this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2026
586 points (97.4% liked)

Political Memes

12206 readers
1951 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Rooki@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
FauxPseudo@lemmy.world
586
EU group chat (feddit.org)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by lokalhorst@feddit.org to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Context:

https://www.euronews.com/next/2026/07/10/chat-control-10-passed-the-european-parliament-through-the-back-door

top 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 72 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The good thing: It's voluntary for companies. The bad thing is: For now.

Signal will not comply, so all the more reason to use this.

But the big companies (meta, Google etc) will definitely use this. If only to get them an itsy bitsy tiny more data about people. Sorry, I meant the ability to protect the children of course.

The EU in itself is a really good thing, but with this they really fucked up, putting the absolutely dubious way to reach this goal aside.

Climate change, wars, rise of Nazi parties everywhere, aren't we fucked enough already?

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Chat Control 1.0 was passed 5 years ago. For whatever reason big companies still don't use it. Most likely they simply don't see the point. They know breaking E2E would hurt their reputation, GDPR still applies and the cost of implementing all this is simply to high to justify it. I'm also guessing they don't really want to be held legally responsible for what people send to each other in any way so prefer not to take part in policing it.

Extending Chat Control 1.0 doesn't change any of this so I don't think meta or Google will take advantage of it now.

[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

https://blog.google/company-news/inside-google/around-the-globe/google-europe/reaffirming-commitment-to-child-safety/

They really want to protect the children. And want to continue their scanning. For the greater good of cause.

But to think they won't be taking advantage of this is, at least in my opinion, giving them too much credit. These companies would sell their grandmothers if they had one.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So why do you think they are not doing it? This law is not new. What are they waiting for and when will they start doing it?

[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Forgive me, I was being sarcastic and tend to forget it sometimes does not translate very well in written text.

They are definitely doing it. From day one onwards. Business as usual for these companies. At least that's what I believe.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why do you think they are hiding it if it's legal and well justified? (protecting children and so on?)

This is not about breaking E2E, it's client side scanning. I'm pretty sure they would be able to do it without the public getting mad about it, same as most people accept age verification. Introducing some client side scanning would not hurt their reputation. It's legal, EU lets then do it. So why hide it? They would be detecting a lot of people sending CP to one another but they would just have to ignore it. If they would report it they would be admitting that they are secretly scanning the messages. If they don't report it they risk lawsuits.

IMHO it just doesn't make sense for them to do it in secret. If they saw benefit in it they would just do it in the open.

[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Client side scanning is not yet here and won't come with the current law. The can scan cloud storage and, if possible, messages. Voluntarily, the are not forced, but they are eager to do it. Client side scanning will come with the next iteration of the law which isn't just here yet. And hopefully will never come.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Client side scanning is not yet here and won’t come with the current law. The can scan cloud storage and, if possible, messages.

We're talking about client side scanning of messages here. This is what Chat Control is about. What 'client side scanning' are you talking about?

Voluntarily, the are not forced, but they are eager to do it.

So I will ask again: why aren't they? The are eager, it's legal, it's been legal for 5 years. Why aren't they doing it?

Why are you saying it will not come with current law? Chat Control 1.0 is about client side scanning of messages. Chat Control 2.0 doesn't change that, it still protects E2E. Chat Control 2.0 is more about age verification, not about scanning messages. I don't think we're even talking about same thing.

[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think so too. English isn't my first language, though I was pretty confident in my explanation, but it seems somewhere somewhat was lost in translation I guess.

Long story short, they are scanning your cloud storage and unencrypted messages. Finished.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 5 days ago

Yes, that's obvious. They don't hide it. It has also nothing to do with Chat Control.

[–] prex@aussie.zone 42 points 6 days ago

Or a not so funny meme

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago

NSA:

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUJUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK THESE MOTHERFUCKERSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yes and then they drone strike you.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago

It's the new swatting.

[–] rogsson@piefed.social 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

laws affecting everyone but the lawmakers should have a mandatory vote by the public. This timeline is beyond fucked up.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

laws excluding the lawmakers should be outright unconstitutional and attempting to push them should be punished as treason.

[–] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Sharing pictures of salad.

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's code for pedophilia. STRAIGHT TO JAIL.

We really care about children. Like, a lot.

[–] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Care so much they keep a whole island full of them.

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Are you serious? Right in front of my salad?!

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

>using communication without E2EE

lol. lmao

[–] synapse1278@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is stage one. Chat Control 2.0 aims to backdoor all messaging app and scan messages before encryption. All the fascists already have frothing mouth just thinking about this law passing just in time for them to take power in several EU countries.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This meme would be more fitting when, if, the 2.0 ever passes. They've had this 1.0 for a while but it's a totally different beast than 2.0

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Still a beast.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 0 points 6 days ago

Eh, voluntary scanning of unencrypted stuff, I assume the companies were already doing that secretly anyway.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Who is that

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 29 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Ursula von der Leyen, head of the European commission

European commission, in turn, enabled laws allowing police to backdoor messaging apps in Europe. Read about Chat Control legislation if you want to know more.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 6 days ago

I recognized her just forgot the name and title

[–] bridgeburner@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Tell me u are from the US without telling me u are from the US lol

[–] UninterestingVoid@reddthat.com 2 points 5 days ago

couldn't you just live in any non EU country and not be intetested in the politics of the EU? It is a big world.

[–] DakRalter@thelemmy.club 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

You mean we've finally found a brexit benefit?!

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

I have bad news for you.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

5 eyea

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

5 eyeatollah

[–] bananabread@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago

It's just someone else reading 🙃