Two things: 1. I thought you were referring to false positives as a result of my favoring funding of existing Child Services working from mandatory reporting f

Two things: 1. I thought you were referring to false positives as a result of my favoring funding of existing Child Services working from mandatory reporting from local relevant professions. 2. My commentary about taking children from parents having its own set of risks was more along the lines of trauma to the child, in that even in if the parent/ child relationship is abusive and harmful, it's such a strong bond that severing it, or restricting it can cause psychological issues. Totally agree with your commentary above regarding any attempt to remove kids from non-abusive parents. Absolutely scorched earth nuclear war. Also, it would actively be a form of child abuse by introducing unnecessary trauma to the child(ren) and possibly instilling a lifelong suspicion (at best) of authority. As a result of that train of thought, my answer is: no false positives would be acceptable. Fundamentally, I'm against personal photos being scanned at all; false positives being one reason, and the broad misapplication of bans by 'big tech' in their implementations of automated systems detecting breaches of policy, and the overall "computer says no" brick wall offered as recourse, being another.