this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
259 points (71.5% liked)

Technology

75963 readers
3274 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
259
EU Chat Control didnt pass - proving the media got to alot of you (www.patrick-breyer.de)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by themurphy@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
87 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Chat Control didnt pass - they didnt even vote because they were afraid the result would be embarassing.

And we got told so many times, that EU now wants Chat Control. But it was a big fat lie.

EU is a democracy with different opinions, and when a small group of facists tries to read your chats, it does not represent the EU opinion.

But the whole media got you thinking so. Proving even on Lemmy, you and me are extremly prone to propaganda.

I quoted the article here with the news:

In a major breakthrough for the digital rights movement, the German government has refused to back the EU’s controversial Chat Control regulation yesterday after facing massive public pressure.

The government did not take a position on the proposal.

This blocks the required majority in the EU Council, derailing the plan to pass the surveillance law next week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That seems like a statement. I'm still lost on how this answers the question

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

They answered the second question. The problem is that OP was not actually posing anything coherent.

They're alleging some made up media conspiracy that makes no sense and undermines the impact of the media on the outcome.

[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 1 points 11 hours ago

OP was not actually posing anything coherent

Yeah, agreed.

I'm not hugely on board with the comment answering the second question though. For me, it's a bit too similar to saying that meteorologists lied to us because they said there was a 60% chance of rain and it didn't happen. In the context of this question its a lot more complicated than that though