4 ms·

> The extreme hysteria created by anything related to children often seems to be carte blanche to destroy privacy and implement backdoors in applications. Yes,

by clnq 3y ago

> The extreme hysteria created by anything related to children often seems to be carte blanche to destroy privacy and implement backdoors in applications. Yes, and you can tell because the proposed solutions attack privacy when alternative solutions exist. For example, simply deleting CSAM material from devices locally without involving any other parties could have achieved the goals without privacy violations. It makes me somewhat uncomfortable to argue for not involving other parties (like the police) in cases where real CSAM is found on someone’s device. Same as most people, I think that CSAM is morally reprehensible and really harmful to society. But just deleting it en-masse would have been an effective and privacy-respecting solution. I think it’s important to see nuance even in things we don’t like to think about. Not everything that has a price tag has a price. We were told we needed to give up privacy, but that wasn’t necessary to take CSAM out of circulation.

salawat 3y ago
Ah... But you see, now you're arguing in "bad faith" because you're trying to protect the kiddie diddlers! ...Understand I don't see it that way and applaud you for your way of thinking. I too have had to wrestle with the very uncomfortable "bed fellows" as it were that adhering to consistent application of principles inevitably results in. The fact remains though that in a large swathe of the population, the ripping off and sacrifice of personal privacy is considered a small price to pay to inflict harm on that subpopulation. My issue comes in in that once you make the exception for one subpopulation, the slope is set. Though even your "just delete it" has dystopian ramifications. Imagine that were implemented like Tianenmen Square? Recordings that are not blessed? You're still leaving in somebody's hands essentially executive control over what information can be allowed to exist, which is an unconscionably powerful lever to build. This is one of those rare circumstances where "do nothing and clean up the mess" may be the most wise course of action.

by clnq 3y ago

salawat 3y ago

Ah... But you see, now you're arguing in "bad faith" because you're trying to protect the kiddie diddlers! ...Understand I don't see it that way and applaud you for your way of thinking. I too have had to wrestle with the very uncomfortable "bed fellows" as it were that adhering to consistent application of principles inevitably results in. The fact remains though that in a large swathe of the population, the ripping off and sacrifice of personal privacy is considered a small price to pay to inflict harm on that subpopulation. My issue comes in in that once you make the exception for one subpopulation, the slope is set. Though even your "just delete it" has dystopian ramifications. Imagine that were implemented like Tianenmen Square? Recordings that are not blessed? You're still leaving in somebody's hands essentially executive control over what information can be allowed to exist, which is an unconscionably powerful lever to build. This is one of those rare circumstances where "do nothing and clean up the mess" may be the most wise course of action.