51–60 of 199 posts
"Protecting kids" is a load of nonsense. It's just a convenient excuse and sounds much better than "we want to read your private stuff".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people are going to start using XMPP/OMEMO.
No reason an XMPP client wouldn't be forced to include this as well. Reminder that iMessage and Signal are encrypted communications but are surely a target of this sort of lawmaking.
https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/system/files/2022-05/Propo... This contains the text of the requirements. Search for "Grooming" and you'll find some particularly horrifying chunks regarding "scanning of conversations for content." Plus, not only known existing CSAM, but also identifying new material. Because don't you trust machine learning that can't tell the difference between a cat and a ferret to know what is a…
"...Thereby, the proposed Regulation limits the interference with the right to personal data protection of users and their right to confidentiality of communications, to what is strictly necessary for the purpose of ensuring the achievement of its objectives, that is, laying down harmonised rules for effectively preventing and combating online child sexual abuse in the internal market..."
For all effects, today the 11 of May, is the day the EU tried to remove the right to privacy in communications in the name of protecting children. From the hundreds of measures and police actions they could take them seem to think this is the most important.
You can be either in support of total surveillance, or in support of abolishing the EU. There is no middle ground.
"Protecting kids" is a load of nonsense. It's just a convenient excuse and sounds much better than "we want to read your private stuff".
the headline is horribly biased (could we change it to "think of the children!"?) but it seems to me if you want to protect children from pedos that you would need to read both of their email, so I don't understand how breaking privacy threatens children.
https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/system/files/2022-05/Propo... This contains the text of the requirements. Search for "Grooming" and you'll find some particularly horrifying chunks regarding "scanning of conversations for content." Plus, not only known existing CSAM, but also identifying new material. Because don't you trust machine learning that can't tell the difference between a cat and a ferret to know what is a…
There's also the simple fact that the reporting of CSAM involves someone seeing CSAM. You see it and then you report it so it gets removed. Does the copy in your browser cache incriminate you? I can also imagine someone deciding they need to save it to forward to the police, whether or not that's useful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you like that? They can focus on ONE justification which is 'acceptable'. But one justification is all they need. They don't need more than one for total access.
Just the brazen "Yeah, privacy and stuff are important, But the Children! " phrasing of it. They're not even trying to pretend it's anything but an excuse anymore.
Yes, we should absolutely do everything we can to protect the children. But losing our privacy is not and can never be an acceptable course of action.
There is a frighteningly short distance from giving up privacy due to CSAM, to a full-blown surveillance state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is so 1984. Even if this remotely worked, how would they tell between actual minors and adults roleplaying?
Smash down doors, get embarrassed a few times, pass legislation to ban "roleplaying as a minor in text conversations." Then there's no reason to be embarrassed again! More practically, I would assume "age of the users of a device" is a well-derived bit of information available to anyone who asks for it with the proper letterhead. Or who just helps themselves to it.
https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/system/files/2022-05/Propo... This contains the text of the requirements. Search for "Grooming" and you'll find some particularly horrifying chunks regarding "scanning of conversations for content." Plus, not only known existing CSAM, but also identifying new material. Because don't you trust machine learning that can't tell the difference between a cat and a ferret to know what is a…
I assume you meant this piece with "scanning of conversations": > As mentioned, detecting ‘grooming’ would have a positive impact on the fundamental rights of potential victims especially by contributing to the prevention of abuse; if swift action is taken, it may even prevent a child from suffering harm. At the same time, the detection process is generally speaking the most intrusive one for users (compared to the d…
I mean considering Amazon has put in kajillions of dollars on their learning algorithms and yet now in 2022 those algorithms still aren’t even smart enough to figure out trivial stuff, like that I’m probably not gonna buy a second air fryer immediately after buying a first one, and stop advertising them to me. What hope do we have for this new algorithm?