Flan~

(Closed RP account) I might look dangerous but I just need some company, after 495 years of solitude~ @BoredCelestial has stolen my heart~

[Flan~ @FlandoruScarlet]

//Due to inactivity, I will drop rping in this account. If you still want to rp with me, hit my dms so we can talk about it. I will leave the tweets and all up, tho. Just unpin the top tweet, and all that jazz.

It has been a nice ride, peace~!

[Pirat_Nation 🔴 @Pirat_Nation]

The European Union is preparing new rules that could limit children’s access to social media.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the Commission will present a proposal after the summer based on recommendations from an expert panel on child online safety.

The panel recommends:

- No screen time for children under 3.
- Supervised internet and social media use for children under 13.
- Social media companies should prove their platforms are safe for children before allowing young users access.

The proposal is not law yet. It still needs to be formally introduced by the European Commission and approved by the European Parliament and EU member states before any new rules take effect.

[Kuze Hideo🏴 @KuzeHideo2032]

@DeepHumor What is all this nonsense? I pay for my internet with my bank account therefore I'm over 18 years old. This is my ID verification! Kids can't pay for the internet! Why is it so hard to understand? It worked for decades with no issues. What happened to privacy?

[Paul Walsh @Paul__Walsh]

Ursula von der Leyen has confirmed that everyone in the EU will need to use the EU's app for identity authentication before being able to access or post on social media websites.

🇪🇺 As an expert in online child safety, I am here to expose the misinformation and misdirection in von der Leyen's statements.

Today von der Leyen said:

"This is not about whether children can access social media, it is about whether social media can access our children".

💡The first part is true. This isn't about children. It's about surveillance and combating political dissent. A state that can't control its own citizens is more dangerous than a state rife with criminals. The second part is a PR soundbite that politicians are using like a campaign slogan straight out of 1984.

🇪🇺"The question is no longer if children face risks online, but what can we do to give children a safer start online".

💡No. You can't give children a "safer start" online any more than you can offline. In the offline world, the government doesn't enforce curfews or ban children from entering liquor stores, bars or restaurants. That's a parent's responsibility. The digital world should be no different.

🇪🇺"The age verification app is one of the tools to get it done".

💡This is a contradiction because she also said "It won't be foolproof".

🇪🇺"It's easy to use, it is privacy preserving and it is open source".

💡The app was compromised as soon as it was released. "Privacy-preserving" age verification is an oxymoron. You can't verify a person's age without verifying their identity. Where or how that age is shared afterwards is irrelevant.

🇪🇺"This is basically about putting back the power into the hands of parents".

💡More from 1984. The EU is doing the opposite. Parents are having their authority stripped by politicians who think they know better. Many parents are capable and unaffected by peer pressure, and they know how to use parental controls to block any app classified as 13+. Some teens are safe, their parents trust them, and the state has no business overruling that trust.

🇪🇺"We don't give our children keys to the car before they have their licence"

💡Comparing an app to a car is a false equivalence used to justify mass surveillance. Governments don't decide when a young person is ready for car keys, guardians do.

💡Forcing every adult and child into a biometric checkpoint just to use an app or website is not licensing drivers. It's the state seizing everyone's keys, locking the garage, and forcing every driver to ask a private company for permission to take a drive.

💡 This is a gross, unethical overreach that strips authority from parents while imposing state sanctioned identity verification on every adult who doesn't even have a child.

💡Additionally, people who pass a test, obtain a licence and drive a car aren't forced to use an app to constantly authenticate their suitability to drive.

🇪🇺"We do not let them buy alcohol until they are legally allowed"

💡False equivalence. We don't force every person to show ID at a shopping mall entrance just because a few people might buy alcohol with a meal at a restaurant. Some parents are okay with their 12 year-old going to the mall with friends while others aren't. Either way, it's their choice. Whatever irresponsible decisions some parents might make, every adult in the country shouldn't be forced to pay the price.

🇪🇺"It won't be foolproof"

💡This is all the proof we need to show that the EU and every government know that banning social media for teens won't protect them. When pressed by journalists about VPNs being used to circumvent a ban, politicians always state the ban isn't a silver bullet and will take time. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan went as far as to say "we know it's not the solution".

💡Either age verification works, or it doesn't. As a technical expert in this space, I can tell you there are no additional steps to take and no progress to be made. Either the approach does what it is supposed to do, or it's not fit for purpose. If they claim a bulletproof solution is coming, it can only mean one thing. They intend to ban or restrict VPNs to people who verify their identity.

🇪🇺"It will take time to invite the cultural change that is already taking shape in our society, just as it took time to outlaw drink driving, just as it took time to use seatbelts in the cars. Great change never happens overnight, but when it comes to our safety it is always worth it".

💡Comparing a social media ban and age verification to seatbelts is a completely broken analogy. Seatbelts are a safety feature that protects children while allowing them to travel in a car. A ban doesn't give kids a seatbelt. It kicks them out of the car entirely.

💡Instead of supporting parents who want to guide their own children through the digital world, this heavy-handed law strips away parental authority by banning the apps and websites that many parents are perfectly fine with and actively monitor.

💡Furthermore, enforcing these bans requires biometric age verification, which means forcing millions of adult citizens to scan their IDs, faces or credit cards just to browse the internet. That isn't a common-sense traffic law.

💡It's a digital checkpoint on every street. True safety means teaching kids how to navigate the digital world safely with real guardrails and parental guidance, not burning down digital spaces for everyone under the guise of protection.

🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to ban teens from social media so every person is forced to verify their identity before they can read, share or post anything online. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous content.

🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to enforce "Chat Control" so every app has to monitor everything people say privately inside it, including apps with end-to-end encryption. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous criminals.

💡Where this ends

🇪🇺 "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever".

George Orwell, 1984.

[Marieke Ehlers 🇳🇱 @MariekeEhlers]

Protecting children starts at home, not in Brussels.

Abolishing anonymous internet for 450 million Europeans just so teenagers can bypass it in the blink of an eye isn't child protection. It's surveillance dressed up as safety.

[ironmouse🇵🇷😈💖 @ironmouse]

testing the waters... dont report me bro...

[Flan~ @FlandoruScarlet]

@Kumi_Virus Pizza Cake.
And I'm Italian.

H o w .

[Miilfy 🌌🥛 ♡ @Miilfywayz]

i am gunna sound like a freak but i dont fucking care.
i love the smell of my sweaty breasts... ughhh i just bury my face in them and smell and it's just so good... sometimes I like to sniff my sweaty bra.. waaaaah... so good... it just smells so addicting?? i dont know why.. 💙

[Max @kudela_maxim]

Imagine the police searching every home in Europe because someone, somewhere, might be hiding heroin.

No warrant. No suspicion. Everyone searched first, innocence checked later.

You would call it mass surveillance.

Do the same to private messages and Brussels calls it Chat Control.

The medium changed. The principle didn’t.

[Individuals echo @IndividualsEcho]

Let me correct this with the same jargain that you dipshits spill in ordet to justify mass surveillance.

Dear citizens of the EU

As you know by now, Chat Control 1.0 was passed undemocratically by these authoritarian clowns, even though the majority was against it, by invoking a controversial urgency procedure that required the opposition to reach a majority of 361 votes, which they unfortunately fell short of. In addition, all of this happened right before the parliamentary summer recess, which caused many empty seats to be counted in favour of the new law.

https://t.co/Ysufd7YyGy

With the Chat Control 2.0 legislation, the EU is now facing an unprecedented attack on encryption and privacy. Corrupt politicians have been heavily lobbied by Thorn and the billionaires funding it, with the goal of banning secure encryption and collecting your data. More information:

https://t.co/zWMbTgd0Iq

https://t.co/5NdcggClB2

https://t.co/fAbwgOffjy

https://t.co/6YDMWeJF1F

https://t.co/UMgVIAizCo

https://t.co/Tn1Qi60WSp

There is also a good list of lobbyists posted here:

https://t.co/lZCfgUxY39

I'll add Peter Hummelgaard too:

https://t.co/IB5f7WzBeP

Europol is also a major concern overall:

https://t.co/DmtkRfPqb3

Importantly, some people argue that Chat Control could end up helping Russia in its war against Ukraine:

https://t.co/dkB1h6k7Wz

All in all, the fact is that none of us can afford to let the 2.0 legislation pass. It doesn't matter whether you are on the right or the left of the political spectrum. This is a decision that affects all of us negatively if it passes. Chat Control 1.0 already violates every citizen's basic right to privacy.

So what can you do to help prevent this blatant attempt at mass surveillance?

1. Contact your MEPs and your national government representatives.

https://t.co/MDBskYQ2xO

2. Support and coordinate legal action. There is a good chance that your country's laws conflict with the 1.0 legislation in a way that could at least slow down its implementation.

3. File complaints with your national data protection authority if a service is scanning your communications in a way you believe violates EU rules on communications secrecy or data protection.

4. Show that you care. Social media is a powerful tool for spreading awareness and expressing your concerns. The more people's voices are heard, the more likely it is that the 2.0 legislation will not be adopted.

5. If you have any knowledge, resources, or connections within your country's legal system, you could file a citizens' initiative. While it is unlikely to succeed if EU law ultimately overrides it, there is still a chance. Doing so would also bring more visibility to the concerns shared by many members of the public.

If these efforts fail and this continent falls further under authoritarian rule, we will find ways to make our data invisible, just as the few criminals this law is supposedly "really meant for" already do. There is already a great and simple guide by @LambentLucien on their profile explaining how to make yourself harder to track.

Good luck, and remember: If we don't do anything about
it, the democracy we know today may not exist anymore.

[Fidias Panayiotou @Fidias0]

Why is the official account of the EU Parliament defending Chat Control if the majority of Members of the European Parliament have voted against it?

At least respect the majority.

[Catbert: Age ID is Socialist & counterproductive @CatbertDeVil]

@Europarl_EN Pre-crime is a disgusting concept that makes up laws such as chat control to punish otherwise non-criminal behavior for the purpose of pre-empting speculated crimes. This is a human rights violation against individual liberties.

[Mimiko Todori @windygrey]

@Europarl_EN I am very pro EU & I am sure Europe being united is an awesome thing. But this is the EU turning into Stasi. Very disappointed how naive are the people that voted for this thinking that it will "help the children". I had higher expectation how informed are in The Parliament...

[The Pale King (Jason Grieve) @jaybirdie1]

@Pirat_Nation Sony and Rockstar will go down in history of taking ownership rights away from gamers, and leaving them with nothing, you can open your digital code at Xmas, gone are the days of us owning anything by pure greed of these two companies.

[亜隣人 @A_RIN_ZIN]

水着んげ
#鈴仙・優曇華院・イナバ

[vkidNSFW (JOIN MY P_TRE0N!) @vkidNSFW_REAL]

How many posts of my OC until I make you fall in love with her?
💙💙💙
#39- Those monsters can swallow a whole ruler, and they get so sweaty during work that it smoothly slips all the way in a single go~

[Filippo 👁️👁️ @FilippoArosio]

#ChatControl 1.0 è una DEROGA alla Direttiva ePrivacy (2002/58/CE) la legge europea che garantisce la segretezza delle comunicazioni online.

Senza deroga i provider non possono scansionare email, messaggi e chat private, salvo ordine del giudice.

Con Chat Control 1.0 (dal 2021) hanno dato il via libera volontario per aggirare questa protezione legale e scansionare tutto, ufficialmente alla ricerca di CSAM (materiale illegale che coinvolge minori).

Dal 2021 Gmail, Outlook, Facebook/Instagram Messenger, Skype, Snapchat, iCloud Mail e Xbox hanno potuto leggere i tuoi contenuti senza crittografia, mentre le app "cifrate" E2EE (Signal, WhatsApp, ecc.) non lo facevano.

La deroga è scaduta ad aprile 2026 dopo la bocciatura del Parlamento,

In pratica: ti hanno già spiato per anni grazie a questa eccezione. Pare che l'UE voglia normalizzare la situazione, cercando di mantenere in vita un percorso verso Chat Control 2.0, molto più restrittivo, vincolante e anche rischioso per la sicurezza dei dispositivi.

Stiamo parlando della stessa EU che "per la nostra sicurezza" ha fatto tappezzare il web di banner che ci avvisano dei cookie. Amara ironia.

👁️👁️

[Paul J. Horten @PauljHorten]

Un elenco di violazioni possibili delle costituzioni dei paei europei dovute al Chat Control dell'Euronazi

[Team Freiheit @Teamfreiheit25]

Wie bereits gestern versprochen:

Wir werden alle rechtlichen Hebel in Bewegung setzen um gegen diesen Anschlag auf unsere Freiheit vorzugehen.

Sie biegen und brechen sogar ihre eigenen Regeln um ihren demokratisch nicht legitimierten Willen durchzusetzen.
Wir dürfen sie nicht damit davonkommen lassen.

[Keith @gnukeith]

The people who passed this should feel ashamed for what they have done.

This is a net-negative wrapped in a “it sounds nice” gift.

EU is not for their people, the citizens are pawns, close to being a social experiment for the leaders of the EU that have read the “guide” book of 1984.

The people are being deliberately lied to, emotionally manipulated to defend this to some degree, people aware of what is going on hate it.

What the EU has done is not protecting their people, it’s creating a surveillance state where every person will be treated as a suspect.

It is no longer innocent until proven guilty.

It is guilty until proven innocent.