Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

[sputr]

I don’t use Facebook Messenger much, but I did recently to reconnect with a friend from my teenage years.

Today I woke up to the following message: “You can’t send messages for 3 days. Something you sent in a chat went against our Community Standards.” This was followed by a button linking to those standards. And yes, all my chats are locked.

So I’ve been put in “time out.” An American corporation has decided I’m not allowed to speak to my friend for 3 days (our only way to communicate—a mistake in hindsight).

And before you ask: what did I say? Most of the conversation was entirely banal. But at one point I was asked about the most memorable things from my time in politics. Among other things, I mentioned a quiet rumor about a ch#ild pros#####on ring (see, I’m self-censoring! I’m a good and obedient citizen!) in a bar frequented by the local political elite. That was last night. And no, my friend did not report me.

People believe private chats to be, well, private. They also believe that Facebook Messenger is encrypted. Neither is true.

Except that when I tell people about this, the most common response is not surprise or anger, but a kind of weary acceptance - as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules.

I was part of the politically active youth a decade ago, fighting for free speech, net neutrality, against censorship, and against corporate power taking over and corrupting what we saw as a beautiful force for good: the internet. It seems we failed. The well-paid IT jobs turned out to be too sweet to pass up.

I guess we still have Signal. For now.

[palata]

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control.

> People believe private chats to be, well, private.

You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily.

> as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules.

The problem I see is that you disagree with how Meta handles Messenger, but still use it. Chat Control or not, there is no law preventing Meta from reading your messages for moderation.

> I guess we still have Signal. For now.

Yes, and that's a good thing.

[sputr]

> First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control.

The EU proposition of Chat Control is the proposition to make it mandatory. Facebook has already been performing it voluntarily (as I've discovered today).

> The problem I see is that you disagree with how Meta handles Messenger, but still use it. Chat Control or not, there is no law preventing Meta from reading your messages for moderation.

Meta isn't just some random company who's decisions don't have wide and far reaching societal effects.

Moderation of private 1v1 chats only make sense in case of harassment - i.e. when one side complains. In all other cases, except with a courts decree based on legitimate suspicion of wrongdoing, it's absurd.

> Yes, and that's a good thing.

For now.

[pancsta]

Everyone should be selfhosting a matrix server, with a guest web inbox. Then, some ppl may connect into networks if they want. Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company. IMs should be like DNS, email, or IRC.

[yocoda]

Zuck didn't build a social network.

Facebook's real product isn't connecting people; it's redefining what human connection means. They proved emotional states transfer via algorithmic contagion¹, then industrialized it.

Graph Search could find anyone based on intimate details, but felt too predatory. So they embedded the same targeting into every interaction; News Feed, Groups, PYMK-recommendations. Same data harvesting, and behavioral influence with an invisible delivery. The brilliance was introducing Groups. It felt like organic community building, and it keeps enough people on Facebook for them to sell ads.

Two generations now think algorithmic feeds and sharing memes counts as socializing. Why predict and connect when you can nudge and influence?

He weaponized culture at scale.

¹ https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320040111

[Centrino]

I thought that Facebook Messenger was end-to-end encrypted for personal one-on-one chats? That's also the reason why Facebook asks you to set a PIN to retrieve your chats on other devices. Only group chats are not E2EE. So yes, this looks like a chat control-like feature where the scanning is done on the client and not on Facebook's servers.

[galaxy_gas]

Whatsapp is e2ee with client reporting

[Raed667]

I've gotten into heated conversations with family members because they insist on only using Facebook Messenger and can't understand why I don't want to be on that platform

[whatamidoingyo]

> People believe private chats to be, well, private. They also believe that Facebook Messenger is encrypted.

Do people really believe this?