It's not too surprising that this bill is going through easily (in the UK) because the media campaign against it has been crap. The major takeaway I get is that

It's not too surprising that this bill is going through easily (in the UK) because the media campaign against it has been crap. The major takeaway I get is that techies are butthurt about not being listened to. And yet there are major risks for every parent and grandparent in the country that should be easy to vicerally bring home to the ordinary voter. What happens if this goes through? Every picture sent in the country gets scanned for possible child abuse. Will the scanning optimise for accurately detecting it and not accusing innocents? No, it will be optimised to pass the buck as hard as possible[1], because the tech companies don't want to business of taking the blame when some pedophile isn't caught. Who is the second level of review? Maybe some minimum wage zero-hours subcontractor at Serco or Group 4 Security. But that's probably it - once the image has been labelled 'bad' no-one else will want to look at it. So, even if you are sending a picture of your own child to your own mother, you have at the very least to have to think about whether it could be mistaken for child abuse by someone you don't know who has about 5 seconds to look at it and is probably from a completely different culture. Quite likely outcomes are that social workers will be sent round to interview lots of innocent parents, who they are primed to suspect are pedophiles, and that there will be an uptick in children being removed from innocent parents. Yet none of this has been brought up in the media either by tech companies or by privacy activists. [1] The other option is that the tech companies abdicate completely and just use some black box from the government to scan every picture. Problems with that left as an exercise...