[bigiain]

They moved from platform USA/Surveillance-Capitalism to platform non-USA/Privacy.

That's a big deal to some of us.

Especially important it the demonstration that your privacy which Google et al, are so insistent on monetizing, does not mean they are charging you less for the same services that other companies can charge when you are paying only with your money, not your privacy as well.

[NitpickLawyer]

> USA/Surveillance-Capitalism to platform non-USA/Privacy.

I laughed at this, as an european. I mean just this year we've had like 3 scares with chat control, and the latest news is that they're still trying / succeeding on some fronts. Please don't reduce such complicated matters to red vs. blue, it's really more complicated and there are no easy solutions anywhere.

[utopiah]

> I laughed at this, as an european. I mean just this year we've had like 3 scares with chat control,

Strange to compare "scares" with a business model that's 20 years old now. Sure the EU is far from perfect but it's like comparing a well known problem to a potential one. One is bad, the other might sucks. It's definitely not equivalent.

[NitpickLawyer]

> It's definitely not equivalent.

We agree, but not for the reasons you think we do.

Chatcontrol is literally 1984. It's mandated at the provider level. You can't opt out.

You can always chose not to participate in the social media, sharing whatever you do. You can't not participate in chat control. Same same, but different.

[ranguna]

You can't opt out because there's nothing to opt out from, chat control is not law, it failed to be approved every single time people tried to bring it up, sometimes it even failed before being voted on (like this last time)

[utopiah]

FWIW I didn't say Chatcontrol was good. I'm saying there is a fundamental difference between a potential law versus an existing situation.

[cromka]

But you get that it's still hypothetical at this point, while it's been going on in the US for, what, 20 years now?

[graemep]

> I laughed at this, as an european. I mean just this year we've had like 3 scares with chat control,

Chat control is an EU thing. The article is about a move to Proton which is Swiss and therefore outside the EU and not directly affected by chat control or other EU laws. Of course the EU might make it illegal for them to supply their services to EU countries, but then no platform anywhere can avoid that problem.

On the whole EU govt surveillance (assuming you live in the EU) is better than EU govt surveillance plus US govt surveillance plus big tech surveillance.

[petcat]

Proton already announced earlier this year that they are leaving Switzerland due to legal uncertainty and relocating their physical infrastructure to Germany, which obviously is in the EU.

[graemep]

Have they moved yet? If not they are not EU yet.

Its also interesting that they have chosen specific EU countries and the differences between countries does matter.

What happens if, as is probable, the EU brings in similar laws?

[tick_tock_tick]

I mean I don't think anyone seriously thinks the USA doesn't have access to all the EU data.

[utopiah]

That's a bold claim, are you implying that encryption is a scam?

[graemep]

All is hyperbole, but given the reach of big tech combined with intelligence gathering it probably does have that access to almost all. Not because of lack of encryption but because there are so many routes to getting that data. The combination of US domination of cloud services with even greater domination of device OSes the US has access to most data if it wants to.

[utopiah]

> almost all. ... access to most data if it wants to.

Well that's a quite an important difference.

[cromka]

I do. I think many do.

[63282836292919]

> They moved from platform USA/Surveillance-Capitalism to platform non-USA/Privacy

I see, the EU propaganda shows effect. Of course a proponent of the non-elected regime doesn't mind the illegal "chat control" and censorship of any wrongthink facilitated by the Digital Services Act.

[ranguna]

Care to elaborate how chat control came into effect?

Last time I checked, it was always rejected, no matter how they reforrmed it. The EU is not one voice, it will always have different opinions. What matters is what's actually voted into law, chat control tried multiple times and it never was.

Also, would you be so kind as to share those wrongthinking related with DSA?

So we an focus on improving things and not bashing on them.

[mrits]

I'd rather Google have my data than the EU

[bigiain]

That's a choice. But it's not everyone's choice. And with <waves hands wildly around>, the non-USA choice is rapidly becoming more popular - at least among the people I know and talk to outside the US.

[mrits]

EU has always and always will be moving away from US tech

[lostlogin]

I’d argue the opposite, that the US is moving away from the rest of the ‘free’ world.

‘Free’ meaning not run by dictators.

[mrits]

Dictators typically don't win popular votes legitimately. Dictators typically don't have the courts constantly overruling them.

Europeans tend to have very little idea how the US government functions. Trump is able to do what he does simply because the people voted for a congress that supports him.

[lostlogin]

> Dictators typically don't win popular votes legitimately.

It also isn’t how you win in the US. The winner of the popular vote was Trump this last round (unlike his first term), but with a far-from-resounding 1.5%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presiden...

[bigiain]

FWIW, my perspective is from Australia, not EU.

[wiseowise]

Is this new “I’d rather have Chinese my data than US”?