3 ms·

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

by ilyt 3y ago

mikece 3y ago
I tend to ignore "think of the children" pleas from people who outsource the education and supervision of their children to the state or other "non-parent providers."
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Right it's not like children are ever abused by family members.
- andai 3y ago
  Alas, we are outnumbered by servants of the machine ;)
anigbrowl 3y ago
It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.
- nforgerit 3y ago
  You know what would help for real? Social workers, parents empowering on things digital, educative initiatives for all stakeholders and proper case-by-case prosecution by prosecution authorities that are not under-financed and overwhelmed. But hey, this way is easier and gives total government control into hands of possibly bad government actors in the future.
  - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
    You're absolutely right, and I've said as much in the past. Social work and educational solutions actually have a chance of making things better, actually giving children the tools and knowledge to protect themselves. Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children": https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-prison-release/102312516 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-...
    - anigbrowl 3y ago
      Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. This shows an ignorance of how law enforcement operates in this space. Sometimes it is retroactive as you say, but often it is preemptive. For example, cops sometimes go looking on social media platforms for people soliciting CSAM, strike up a relationship, and talk people who take the bait into a physical meeting, at which point they pull out the badge and a warrant and examine the target's phone for evidence of existing possession. Another approach when potential crimes are reported (eg by a parent who discovers someone attempting to seduce their kid) is to silently take over the victim's role in the conversation and lure the would-be predator into a meeting, at which point the cuffs come out. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children" Yes, but what of it? This is a fallacy of composition, which assumes that failures or perverse legal outcomes are all part of some twisted masterplan designed to strip away freedoms. It's just cope, like the arguments in the wake of mass shootings that they are all secretly engineered by the FBI, based on the fact that the FBI or other law enforcement agencies sometimes fail to act on warning signs that seem obvious with hindsight.
      - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
        Excellent points on #1, thanks for mentioning, I'll take those examples on board. Regarding #2, I'm in no way conspiratorial about it, but it's a single data point in the opposite direction, which points to a lack of resources or a well thought out over-arching plan to solve the problem. None of that is conspiracy, it's reality, but it's also embarassing to 'policy', and should be pointed out as such. (I'm in no way saying they're trying to encourage, not at all).
- waboremo 3y ago
  We do need better layered solutions here for sure. In the same way that we can't "defeat drug abuse" by jailing everyone, there needs to be a multitude of solutions at every interval to help. While I think privacy advocates are far more in favor of even looking for these solutions at all, it's also our duty to find and push these solutions because ultimately, others will not care. Optics are just too horrible, hence how swiftly these things move. What's interesting is that recently privacy advocates have thankfully also recognized that "think of the children" can be a legitimate argument, and have been using it to fight against horrible solutions. But we really have to move past this and find better solutions, it can't be this endless tit for tat as "both sides" wind up losing.
- ilyt 3y ago
  Sure but it isn't distributed via voice calls on public voice networks...
- WinstonSmith84 3y ago
  > CSAM is a real and measurable problem Well, I'd be curious to see how widespread CSAM is altogether, and especially how much WhatsApp, Messengers, and others are relevant for abusers. One thing I know about this topic is that the offenders are mostly close relatives. The thing I don't know, but intuitively, I'd not think that a close relative would take the risk of sending compromising messages on the smartphone of the victim. Not denying it never exists, but what are the numbers we are talking about? As neutral as I'm trying to think, it's very very hard to see a genuine intention into what the EU is doing
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    Abusers are often close relatives, family friends, or stereotypically trustworthy figures like pastors, but both child porn and sometimes children are trafficked. I don't have stats off the top of my head, but it's possible, albeit labor-intensive, to make some inferences. Many child porn cases are prosecuted at the federal level because electronic communications are a kind of interstate commerce. By digging through PACER and similar legal databases, it's not too hard to build a corpus of criminal complaints. The really labor intensive part (although ML and other methods help to shorten it) is parsing the legalistic documents to extract information about which platforms most easily facilitate contact and negotiations between peers (CSAM enthusiasts) and targets (unwary kids preyed upon by unscrupulous adults). It might also be possible to extract information on prosecutions resulting from a report or fortuitous discovery of CSAM-related activity, and that involving sting operations by law enforcement.
- johngladtj 3y ago
  There is no problem, there has never been a problem, and there never will be a problem. It has always without exceptions been a moral panic encouraged and nurtured by established interests to support their urge for more and more control.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    Paranoid bullshit, easily disproved by the fact of people serving very long prison sentences based on an abundance of evidence. These cases are generally not that hard to prosecute because offenders typically have a wildly distorted risk calculus and either incriminate themselves to someone they imagine shares their tastes, or because search warrants turn up a ton of physical evidence - sometimes quite literally: https://cbs12.com/news/local/child-pornography-arrest-paul-zittel-ocala-marion-county-ton-csam-boxes-february-23-2023 https://cbs12.com/news/local/child-pornography-arrest-paul-z...
- SuperShibe 3y ago
  While CSAM is indeed a problem, it's not a technical but a societal one. Fighting this on the technical side wont't work (other countries already tried and failed to do so). As big of a problem as CSAM may be, failing to acknowledging that tech can't be the sole solution has to be either a sign of malice or incompetence.

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

by ilyt 3y ago

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

I tend to ignore "think of the children" pleas from people who outsource the education and supervision of their children to the state or other "non-parent providers."

anigbrowl 3y ago
Right it's not like children are ever abused by family members.
andai 3y ago
Alas, we are outnumbered by servants of the machine ;)

anigbrowl 3y ago

It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.

nforgerit 3y ago
You know what would help for real? Social workers, parents empowering on things digital, educative initiatives for all stakeholders and proper case-by-case prosecution by prosecution authorities that are not under-financed and overwhelmed. But hey, this way is easier and gives total government control into hands of possibly bad government actors in the future.
- BLKNSLVR 3y ago
  You're absolutely right, and I've said as much in the past. Social work and educational solutions actually have a chance of making things better, actually giving children the tools and knowledge to protect themselves. Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children": https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-prison-release/102312516 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-...
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. This shows an ignorance of how law enforcement operates in this space. Sometimes it is retroactive as you say, but often it is preemptive. For example, cops sometimes go looking on social media platforms for people soliciting CSAM, strike up a relationship, and talk people who take the bait into a physical meeting, at which point they pull out the badge and a warrant and examine the target's phone for evidence of existing possession. Another approach when potential crimes are reported (eg by a parent who discovers someone attempting to seduce their kid) is to silently take over the victim's role in the conversation and lure the would-be predator into a meeting, at which point the cuffs come out. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children" Yes, but what of it? This is a fallacy of composition, which assumes that failures or perverse legal outcomes are all part of some twisted masterplan designed to strip away freedoms. It's just cope, like the arguments in the wake of mass shootings that they are all secretly engineered by the FBI, based on the fact that the FBI or other law enforcement agencies sometimes fail to act on warning signs that seem obvious with hindsight.
    - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
      Excellent points on #1, thanks for mentioning, I'll take those examples on board. Regarding #2, I'm in no way conspiratorial about it, but it's a single data point in the opposite direction, which points to a lack of resources or a well thought out over-arching plan to solve the problem. None of that is conspiracy, it's reality, but it's also embarassing to 'policy', and should be pointed out as such. (I'm in no way saying they're trying to encourage, not at all).
waboremo 3y ago
We do need better layered solutions here for sure. In the same way that we can't "defeat drug abuse" by jailing everyone, there needs to be a multitude of solutions at every interval to help. While I think privacy advocates are far more in favor of even looking for these solutions at all, it's also our duty to find and push these solutions because ultimately, others will not care. Optics are just too horrible, hence how swiftly these things move. What's interesting is that recently privacy advocates have thankfully also recognized that "think of the children" can be a legitimate argument, and have been using it to fight against horrible solutions. But we really have to move past this and find better solutions, it can't be this endless tit for tat as "both sides" wind up losing.
ilyt 3y ago
Sure but it isn't distributed via voice calls on public voice networks...
WinstonSmith84 3y ago
> CSAM is a real and measurable problem Well, I'd be curious to see how widespread CSAM is altogether, and especially how much WhatsApp, Messengers, and others are relevant for abusers. One thing I know about this topic is that the offenders are mostly close relatives. The thing I don't know, but intuitively, I'd not think that a close relative would take the risk of sending compromising messages on the smartphone of the victim. Not denying it never exists, but what are the numbers we are talking about? As neutral as I'm trying to think, it's very very hard to see a genuine intention into what the EU is doing
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Abusers are often close relatives, family friends, or stereotypically trustworthy figures like pastors, but both child porn and sometimes children are trafficked. I don't have stats off the top of my head, but it's possible, albeit labor-intensive, to make some inferences. Many child porn cases are prosecuted at the federal level because electronic communications are a kind of interstate commerce. By digging through PACER and similar legal databases, it's not too hard to build a corpus of criminal complaints. The really labor intensive part (although ML and other methods help to shorten it) is parsing the legalistic documents to extract information about which platforms most easily facilitate contact and negotiations between peers (CSAM enthusiasts) and targets (unwary kids preyed upon by unscrupulous adults). It might also be possible to extract information on prosecutions resulting from a report or fortuitous discovery of CSAM-related activity, and that involving sting operations by law enforcement.
johngladtj 3y ago
There is no problem, there has never been a problem, and there never will be a problem. It has always without exceptions been a moral panic encouraged and nurtured by established interests to support their urge for more and more control.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Paranoid bullshit, easily disproved by the fact of people serving very long prison sentences based on an abundance of evidence. These cases are generally not that hard to prosecute because offenders typically have a wildly distorted risk calculus and either incriminate themselves to someone they imagine shares their tastes, or because search warrants turn up a ton of physical evidence - sometimes quite literally: https://cbs12.com/news/local/child-pornography-arrest-paul-zittel-ocala-marion-county-ton-csam-boxes-february-23-2023 https://cbs12.com/news/local/child-pornography-arrest-paul-z...
SuperShibe 3y ago
While CSAM is indeed a problem, it's not a technical but a societal one. Fighting this on the technical side wont't work (other countries already tried and failed to do so). As big of a problem as CSAM may be, failing to acknowledging that tech can't be the sole solution has to be either a sign of malice or incompetence.