Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

netzpolitik.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 443 posts

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#71

Post by martin_a »

sofixa wrote: post #43
Aeolun wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was hard to arrest criminals before digital communication as well, I’m sure we’ll deal.

But each improvement in communications tech (landlines, mobile phones, internet) have enabled new, faster, easier, better communication methods. Medieval criminals would have to physically meet to coordinate a coach robbery; nowadays a terrorist attack can be coordinated fully remotely and anonymously. There is no point in denying the facts - that encryption and the ease of use of the Internet enable criminals to coo…

Coach robbery has reduced dramatically though, after inventing the internet.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#72

Post by perryizgr8 »

throwaway22032 wrote: post #10

Which messenger do we switch to if this goes in? I don't think I'd have an issue convincing people. Is Signal subject to this? Telegram? Do we need something "less mainstream"?

Whatsapp seems to be best, they have end to end encryption for every chat. As long as you don't use an Iphone (where your phone itself can turn against you[1]), you will be fine.

[1] https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/Expanded_Protections_...

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#73

Post by mantas »

uvesten wrote: post #48

How many EU beaureaucrats got their training in East Germany, I wonder? Or is it rather that they are too young and do not know about/remember what constant surveillance does to trust in a society?

Rather a lot of them were young and naive left-wing supporters who looked at USSR through rose glasses.

Wouldn't you want to be bureaucrat in late USSR? No threat of purges above you, only endless opportunity to play with your minions as you see fit.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#74

Post by riedel »

DangerousPie wrote: post #39

Important to note that this is not 10% of all messages being falsely flagged (= 10% false positive rate), but 10% of flagged messages being false positives (= 90% precision). As someone who works with these types of classification problems in a different context, 90% precision is actually quite good - especially assuming there is some sort of manual review process to take care of the 10%. Whether that makes this whol…

However, I hardly doubt that they will actually adapt their recall to actually ensure a 90% precision based on court evaluation. I think this is all handwaving and throwing around numbers which as described won't be part of any legal act.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#75

Post by gloppers »

7373737373 wrote: post #65
gloppers wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to be so rude. From the law enforcement side, that is the system working as it should - the police investigated and cleared him of any wrongdoing. That Google can close someone's account for any reason and without any recourse is a wider issue, and one separate to this EU regulation.

Give me access to yours and your childrens' phones, I suspect that you or one of them may be a pedophile. Don't want to? Too bad, here is the law that says that I can get it all anyway. Don't worry, I'm a good programmer, I won't see it myself, I'll let one of my algorithms do it for me (I can't tell you how it works though, since you may use that information to hide something from me)! I pinky promise that neither I…

Yes that sounds fine to me. We have specially trained police in this category of crimes, for good reason. I trust them to investigate fairly and proportionately.

If we cast aside the hyperbole and look at the actual details of what is being proposed in this regulation, it's clear they're taking a decent and reasonable approach here.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#76

Post by joelhaasnoot »

GuB-42 wrote: post #68

Actually 10% false positive rate is not that bad if the system really has a 90% chance of detecting child abuse. Keep in mind that it only raises a flag, it doesn't automatically results in a false conviction. I don't have the numbers but I think that during an investigation, way more than 10% of suspects did nothing wrong. In fact, some people estimate that 10% of convictions are wrong (though I think that's an over…

So 10% of Google accounts are now banned?

https://nypost.com/2022/08/22/google-bans-dad-for-sending-pi...

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#77

Post by [deleted] »

mayoi wrote: post #58
Aeolun wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was hard to arrest criminals before digital communication as well, I’m sure we’ll deal.

You can deal with it on your own. I won't be putting up with this, go ahead, make encryption illegal, I'll follow along with you to every fucking court because you have 0 proof that my disk drive is encrypted instead of overwritten with content of /dev/urandom

[deleted]

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#78

Post by mantas »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #64
uvesten wrote: post #48

How many EU beaureaucrats got their training in East Germany, I wonder? Or is it rather that they are too young and do not know about/remember what constant surveillance does to trust in a society?

[flagged]

Silly fear of communism/socialism? :) Why would we be afraid of the thing that messed up with us for 50 years? :) It's funny when Westerners who have no practical experience talk down to us how we should throw away our practical experience...

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#79

Post by goodpoint »

GuB-42 wrote: post #68

Actually 10% false positive rate is not that bad if the system really has a 90% chance of detecting child abuse. Keep in mind that it only raises a flag, it doesn't automatically results in a false conviction. I don't have the numbers but I think that during an investigation, way more than 10% of suspects did nothing wrong. In fact, some people estimate that 10% of convictions are wrong (though I think that's an over…

Even 1% false positive rate would be beyond ridiculous and completely unusable.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#80

Post by jeofken »

leodriesch wrote: post #70
rjzzleep wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> It specifically prohibits discrimination and welcomes people from other nations, both of which the average German does not actually like That’s an absolutely wild claim and I’d like to know where you got this impression from.

Have you ever seen a poll of a European country where people wanted more immigration (from the 3rd world)?
Post reply on HN