3 ms·

The article’s claim is simply nonsense. As I quoted, the article literally says “they can discover if their abuser is a repeat offender” but in-fact they can on

The article’s claim is simply nonsense. As I quoted, the article literally says “they can discover if their abuser is a repeat offender” but in-fact they can only discover if any anonymous accusations have been registered.

lupire 4y ago
If a person is being accused, they offended the accuser in some way.
- Eleison23 4y ago
  A zero-knowledge database like that is guaranteed to have no method of oversight and likewise to be immediately gamed and trolled by anyone with a grudge about anyone.
  - nl 4y ago
    It's unclear how this would work, given the thoughtful way the project has implemented it.
    - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
      It’s very simple. Person registers a name then receives notification that others have registered the same name, then conflates that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does.
    - Eleison23 4y ago
      All you need is someone's social media handle to silently accuse them of some sexual offense without need for proof or evidence. So a few dozen women could coordinate an attack on Elon Musk or basically anyone they want who they know on social media.
      - nl 4y ago
        But.. If they choose they can do this without this tool - and this does nothing to make that easier or to amplify them. All it does is get a lawyer to contact them - which is something they could do already if they are making something up.
nl 4y ago
Seems like splitting hairs. If the person using it is registering their assault and the perpetrator is already in the database then the person entering that name in be notified. The article doesn't need to make the presumption of innocence - it's not a trial, it's showing how this is helpful to a victim of assault. There's no "two sides" argument here. If you check out the the Project Callisto website they outline the protections there are for accused - namely that they can never be named to the lawyers who get involved by the project. That has to be done by the individuals making the accusation to the lawyers. It is - as the article says - a way of letting the victims know they are not alone.
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
  >The article doesn't need to make the presumption of innocence Nor does the article have any business making the presumption of guilt, but it does exactly that. I am criticizing what the article actually does, not expecting it to do something more. All it takes is a person registering a name then receiving notification that others have registered the same name, then conflating that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does. If the article didn’t set such a good example of how to ruin an innocent person’s life, I wouldn’t be concerned.
  - nl 4y ago
    But the person entering the details already thinks the person they are entering it in is guilty, so unclear why getting notified would be "conflating that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does". > If the article didn’t set such a good example of how to ruin an innocent person’s life But it doesn't? The accused person is never named publicly - a lawyer is involved to help decide on next steps. It seems you are concerned about fraudulent accusations. But this doesn't seem to do anything to make fraudulent accusations easier in any way because the public accusation is out-of-scope of what it does.

lupire 4y ago

If a person is being accused, they offended the accuser in some way.

Eleison23 4y ago
A zero-knowledge database like that is guaranteed to have no method of oversight and likewise to be immediately gamed and trolled by anyone with a grudge about anyone.
- nl 4y ago
  It's unclear how this would work, given the thoughtful way the project has implemented it.
  - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
    It’s very simple. Person registers a name then receives notification that others have registered the same name, then conflates that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does.
  - Eleison23 4y ago
    All you need is someone's social media handle to silently accuse them of some sexual offense without need for proof or evidence. So a few dozen women could coordinate an attack on Elon Musk or basically anyone they want who they know on social media.
    - nl 4y ago
      But.. If they choose they can do this without this tool - and this does nothing to make that easier or to amplify them. All it does is get a lawyer to contact them - which is something they could do already if they are making something up.

nl 4y ago

Seems like splitting hairs. If the person using it is registering their assault and the perpetrator is already in the database then the person entering that name in be notified. The article doesn't need to make the presumption of innocence - it's not a trial, it's showing how this is helpful to a victim of assault. There's no "two sides" argument here. If you check out the the Project Callisto website they outline the protections there are for accused - namely that they can never be named to the lawyers who get involved by the project. That has to be done by the individuals making the accusation to the lawyers. It is - as the article says - a way of letting the victims know they are not alone.

nopenopenopeno 4y ago
>The article doesn't need to make the presumption of innocence Nor does the article have any business making the presumption of guilt, but it does exactly that. I am criticizing what the article actually does, not expecting it to do something more. All it takes is a person registering a name then receiving notification that others have registered the same name, then conflating that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does. If the article didn’t set such a good example of how to ruin an innocent person’s life, I wouldn’t be concerned.
- nl 4y ago
  But the person entering the details already thinks the person they are entering it in is guilty, so unclear why getting notified would be "conflating that with evidence of guilt in the same exact manner the articles does". > If the article didn’t set such a good example of how to ruin an innocent person’s life But it doesn't? The accused person is never named publicly - a lawyer is involved to help decide on next steps. It seems you are concerned about fraudulent accusations. But this doesn't seem to do anything to make fraudulent accusations easier in any way because the public accusation is out-of-scope of what it does.