48 ms·

> it's better to allow scanning of children's communications, rather than ensuring their communication with whoever they are talking to is end-to-end encrypted.

> it's better to allow scanning of children's communications, rather than ensuring their communication with whoever they are talking to is end-to-end encrypted. This is not purely a technical matter. Children and adolescents want confidential communication just like older people. You might argue, that it is in the best interest of minors to have someone/something look at their private communication to intervene if necessary, but there are much better and more versatile ways to protect the children: Educate them and their parents. Children need to learn how to manage trust with strangers in the offline and online world anyway and the internet doesn't change that. In fact, sexual abuse usually has an offline component to it that you can only effectively protect against by educating children.

xzjis 2y ago
>there are much better and more versatile ways to protect the children: Educate them and their parents. That's exactly it, we should address the root cause of the problem, not its consequences by punishing and threatening to be punished. It's much more effective.
newswasboring 2y ago
> Educate them and their parents. Children need to learn how to manage trust with strangers in the offline and online world anyway and the internet doesn't change that. I'm not sure this is even possible. I understand children are smart but I don't think they are this smart. We can educate children to be cautious but i don't think we should expect them not to get out witted by an adult.
- vaylian 2y ago
  Children are smart enough to understand that no stranger except for a doctor should request to see their private parts. Children are smart enough to learn that they should not respond to sharing names, ages and locations when asked about it on the internet. Also: Children are a lot smarter than AI, which is allegedly the super-magical protection against child grooming.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    > Children are smart enough to learn that they should not share names, ages and locations with strangers on the internet. I'm old enough to remember when that was the norm. But it's been along time now since Facebook etc. came along, and they spent the entire time since then insisting on a real-name policy and asking us to give details of our age, our location, which school we go to, and post a continuous stream of photos of ourselves. > Also: Children are a lot smarter than AI, which is allegedly the super-magical protection against child grooming. By what measure are children smarter?
    - kaba0 2y ago
      Any measure? ChatGPT still can’t solve a sudoku, let alone do any form of reasoning. It’s more of a search engine than “intelligence”, while humans obviously can reason and solve novel tasks.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        > ChatGPT still can’t solve a sudoku, Now you've got me wondering, if there's even an appropriate test set to find out. When I do a sudoku, it's either printed and then I don't know if I made a mistake until the very end; or it's on a computer which tells me about mistakes as soon as I make them. I do know I make mistakes when doing them, but I don't know how often — more or less frequently than ChatGPT. (Also, at least one LLM has been demonstrated to do Turing-machine-like operations[0], and there were Sudoku-solving AI well before LLMs). > let alone do any form of reasoning. It’s more of a search engine than “intelligence”, while humans obviously can reason and solve novel tasks. I am aware of Clever-Hand and that I may be making the same mistake, but it sure looks like it can do those things as well as humans. Humans aren't that great either when it comes to genuinely novel tasks, which is why we have to be trained to do science and use the method of falsification. [0] I'm not sure if I need the "-like" caveat? https://manifold.markets/DanMan314/will-anyone-win-victortaelins-10k-a https://manifold.markets/DanMan314/will-anyone-win-victortae...
        kaba0 2y ago
CJefferson 2y ago
There are many ways we don't give children the same rights as adults. They might want confidential communication, but I'm not sure they should have it. Why are you so sure that it is better and more versatile to educate them and their parents? We've been educating children, and parents, basically forever (and I've done a lot of educating of children myself). While they are young and still learning, I really believe they do need a mixture of freedom and guard-rails, to ensure they can't do themselves too much harm while still developing.
- kaba0 2y ago
  And who exactly is a children? Because teenagers infantilization is a grave issue in the US, where they can in several states buy guns and die for their country, but can’t drink a beer, and they having sex with their peers is somehow viewed as wrong. A ~15 years old absolutely should have every right to private communication.
- squigz 2y ago
  > They might want confidential communication, but I'm not sure they should have it. Why not? Assuming you're using a Western metric of what a child is, why does a 17 year old not have the right to private communication, but an 18 year old does? Furthermore, why do you think corporations are going to be like "Oh, this person is 18 now. We're going to respect their privacy now!"?
  - gambiting 2y ago
    Well, for the exact same reason why in many western countries we decide that 17 year olds are not capable of consenting to sex, but 18 year olds are, same with driving a car, drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes - the cut off is somewhat arbitrary but there has to be one. If it's not 18 then what other age is appropriate? Or do you believe that a child of any age should have access to completely confidential communication outside of a medical setting?
    - squigz 2y ago
      > Or do you believe that a child of any age should have access to completely confidential communication outside of a medical setting? Confidential from governments/corporations/people that aren't their parents? Yes, absolutely.

xzjis 2y ago

>there are much better and more versatile ways to protect the children: Educate them and their parents. That's exactly it, we should address the root cause of the problem, not its consequences by punishing and threatening to be punished. It's much more effective.

newswasboring 2y ago

> Educate them and their parents. Children need to learn how to manage trust with strangers in the offline and online world anyway and the internet doesn't change that. I'm not sure this is even possible. I understand children are smart but I don't think they are this smart. We can educate children to be cautious but i don't think we should expect them not to get out witted by an adult.

vaylian 2y ago
Children are smart enough to understand that no stranger except for a doctor should request to see their private parts. Children are smart enough to learn that they should not respond to sharing names, ages and locations when asked about it on the internet. Also: Children are a lot smarter than AI, which is allegedly the super-magical protection against child grooming.
- ben_w 2y ago
  > Children are smart enough to learn that they should not share names, ages and locations with strangers on the internet. I'm old enough to remember when that was the norm. But it's been along time now since Facebook etc. came along, and they spent the entire time since then insisting on a real-name policy and asking us to give details of our age, our location, which school we go to, and post a continuous stream of photos of ourselves. > Also: Children are a lot smarter than AI, which is allegedly the super-magical protection against child grooming. By what measure are children smarter?
  - kaba0 2y ago
    Any measure? ChatGPT still can’t solve a sudoku, let alone do any form of reasoning. It’s more of a search engine than “intelligence”, while humans obviously can reason and solve novel tasks.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      > ChatGPT still can’t solve a sudoku, Now you've got me wondering, if there's even an appropriate test set to find out. When I do a sudoku, it's either printed and then I don't know if I made a mistake until the very end; or it's on a computer which tells me about mistakes as soon as I make them. I do know I make mistakes when doing them, but I don't know how often — more or less frequently than ChatGPT. (Also, at least one LLM has been demonstrated to do Turing-machine-like operations[0], and there were Sudoku-solving AI well before LLMs). > let alone do any form of reasoning. It’s more of a search engine than “intelligence”, while humans obviously can reason and solve novel tasks. I am aware of Clever-Hand and that I may be making the same mistake, but it sure looks like it can do those things as well as humans. Humans aren't that great either when it comes to genuinely novel tasks, which is why we have to be trained to do science and use the method of falsification. [0] I'm not sure if I need the "-like" caveat? https://manifold.markets/DanMan314/will-anyone-win-victortaelins-10k-a https://manifold.markets/DanMan314/will-anyone-win-victortae...
      - kaba0 2y ago

CJefferson 2y ago

There are many ways we don't give children the same rights as adults. They might want confidential communication, but I'm not sure they should have it. Why are you so sure that it is better and more versatile to educate them and their parents? We've been educating children, and parents, basically forever (and I've done a lot of educating of children myself). While they are young and still learning, I really believe they do need a mixture of freedom and guard-rails, to ensure they can't do themselves too much harm while still developing.

kaba0 2y ago
And who exactly is a children? Because teenagers infantilization is a grave issue in the US, where they can in several states buy guns and die for their country, but can’t drink a beer, and they having sex with their peers is somehow viewed as wrong. A ~15 years old absolutely should have every right to private communication.
squigz 2y ago
> They might want confidential communication, but I'm not sure they should have it. Why not? Assuming you're using a Western metric of what a child is, why does a 17 year old not have the right to private communication, but an 18 year old does? Furthermore, why do you think corporations are going to be like "Oh, this person is 18 now. We're going to respect their privacy now!"?
- gambiting 2y ago
  Well, for the exact same reason why in many western countries we decide that 17 year olds are not capable of consenting to sex, but 18 year olds are, same with driving a car, drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes - the cut off is somewhat arbitrary but there has to be one. If it's not 18 then what other age is appropriate? Or do you believe that a child of any age should have access to completely confidential communication outside of a medical setting?
  - squigz 2y ago
    > Or do you believe that a child of any age should have access to completely confidential communication outside of a medical setting? Confidential from governments/corporations/people that aren't their parents? Yes, absolutely.