4 ms·
Furthermore - and the extent of this was eye opening to me and I'm not the most naive person: What for parents is "children playing in the pool in the garden
by skinkestek 5y ago
Furthermore - and the extent of this was eye opening to me and I'm not the most naive person:
What for parents is "children playing in the pool in the garden - shared on YouTube so grandparents could see it"
- is something that is collected into playlists and shared with "interesting" timestamps in certain circles. A story here on HN a couple of years ago about a (for us normal people) totally innocent video having reached a million views or something on YouTube because of this sick and ugly thing.
But now we must ask ourselves: is that video CP?
No, for everyone else.
Yes for these sick bastards.
How do you classify that?
If it is classified, what happens to the parents when they switch from Android to iPhone and backup the photos and videos to "summer memories 2017" in iCloud?
- simondotau 5y agoI agree that "children playing in the pool in the garden" can function as CP when viewed by a sick bastard. But just because material can function as CP doesn't turn it into CSAM. It would never be classified under any of the formal CSAM categories (A1, A2, B1, B2) unless the video included lascivious exhibition, e.g. focus on genitals, sexual touching or posing, or an aroused adult. The definitions are horrifyingly, depressingly, tragically very clear. I did not enjoy reading them.
- skinkestek 5y agoOK, thanks for the update. I think we more or less agree.