101–110 of 431 posts
That being said, what are the realistic alternatives? Self compiled Signal? Matrix running on own server? Something else, like these Sky app supposedly used by criminals and drug dealers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>nobody wants to start falsely accusing innocent people. If anything, the 21st century has proven quite a few people are more than willing to do so when they deem the lack of true positives to be the greater evil. Or even just doing it for their own benefit.
Can you give some EU specific examples that can be considered representative and not huge outliers? Shit happens everywhere but where am I in Europe if anything there's a lack of law enforcement in the sense that prison terms always seem to be considered too low, people with sentences under X months don't actually go to jail because of overcrowding, police is constantly frustrated that people they pick off the street…
You can't go telling "yeah we really care about innocent people" when you let an algorithm wreak havoc producing false positives and then take ages to fix it while the families are still dealing with the aftermath. That's the opposite, caring for true positives despite the potential false positives produced.
I'd also ask you to take a few trips down some ideologies. If you believe "EU is so nice it can do no wrong", you'll probably be cured of it soon when you realize extremists are spread all around the world, and have no qualms exercising their sense of justice even if it hurts innocent people.
It's scary, because CSAM (child sexual abuse material) is very, very broad, and quite vague in its definition¹. My three year old son stayed with my parents for a week, and he was being taught to swim in their swimming pool. Of course, I get sent pictures and clips of his progress by a proud grandma, and of course, him being a toddler, he felt swimming trunks to be completely optional (and of course, they are at his…
I mean that's cute and all, but why are your parents taking pictures of naked children and publishing them online? That's making assumptions about the channel used to send them and the phone itself being secure. Better to not risk it - not because of this legislation, but because of anyone else that might be listening in.
seems like maybe a better approach might be to require software developers to give parents/guardians features that allow a comprehensive view into the online activities of their children. although unclear, that creates more visibility than has ever existed and could cause problems for kids who have different views from their parents. we're in uncharted territory, really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>nobody wants to start falsely accusing innocent people. If anything, the 21st century has proven quite a few people are more than willing to do so when they deem the lack of true positives to be the greater evil. Or even just doing it for their own benefit.
Can you give some EU specific examples that can be considered representative and not huge outliers? Shit happens everywhere but where am I in Europe if anything there's a lack of law enforcement in the sense that prison terms always seem to be considered too low, people with sentences under X months don't actually go to jail because of overcrowding, police is constantly frustrated that people they pick off the street…
Edit: sorry, I thought this was in reply to my sibling comment. See the two examples mentioned there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most (all?) restrictions where imposed by the governments. Can you give us more details or some example on that “total control” the European Commission actually exercised.
And the national government excuse usually is, that they do it according to EU rules, directive or whatever. Denying responsibility at all levels at its finest. There are rare examples of resistance, like the attempt of Czech government to resist the EU firearms directive by putting the right to self-defense with a gun into the constitution. But mostly they just fold over.
You call it "fold over", but if you think of a positive thing, it's cooperation. Because we have open borders - which, if you look at Brexit, is a huge advantage for trade and the like - it doesn't make sense to allow firearms in one country but ban them in another. It's a give and take situation. The UK decided they didn't want any part in it and... it decimated their economy, their imports and exports, their properties owned abroad, and any companies operating under an .eu domain name; it's caused an economic shift in Ireland which may very well be on the way to unification now, and it may trigger Scotland to leave the Commonwealth and join the EU.
The HN attitude on anything touching privacy with a ten foot pole is awkward at best. It's clearly a hard problem and increasingly so. Being dogmatic about privacy regulations without a solution for the abuse caused by those who are open to abusing others seems a little too internet-hippie to be taken seriously in 2022, and that's a little concerning when it's the echo chambers of those best qualified and responsible…
I think the problem stems from the fact we don't see abusers being publicly judged routinely, which gives a feeling that those abusers are very rare, and can't justify massive surveillance mainly because it's inefficient against any behavior not widely spread into the population.
Yeah not like this. I will turn myself into a black hole as much as possible. If they somehow ever come to suspect me of these things I will gladly do anything I can to support their investigations. They can come by with a warrant, look through my message history specifically and only for evidence related to their investigation, it will happen in my presence, and no copies of my data will be made and/or fed into the…
Unfortunately, here's what will really happen: 5:30am, loud knock at the door. You open the door a crack to see who it is. Cops bust in. You're immediately handcuffed and sat outside. Cops take anything with a screen, usb plug, etc. All your media. All your computers. All your external hard drives. Every one of these devices will be imaged, and archived prior to being searched. The data will be kept for years, to pro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably not the first person to ask the question of "but what about parents taking pictures of their naked kids in a pool", I'm sure they plan on having some way of dealing with it if anything to lighten their workload. That doesn't mean it will be perfect but no matter how jaded we all are, nobody wants to start falsely accusing innocent people.
It always amazes me how anyone can be technologically literate and still think world governments should be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like this. I agree OP, most people in government are probably not inherently evil or malicious but why should anyone trust that these initiatives won’t be poorly implemented and cause massive collateral damage to innocent lives?
Yes I do think that. I'm very familiar with how the EU institutions work and I don't like it, so I'm no fan boy and certainly not trying to defend these kind of proposals.
I realize I'm preaching to a very cynical crowd here but I just don't see EU countries locking up innocent people accused of being pedophiles en masse by some garbage AI (different story entirely in the US or China).
Justice here massively leans toward giving people the benefit of the doubt, imposing light sentences etc. much to everyone's frustration.
It's scary, because CSAM (child sexual abuse material) is very, very broad, and quite vague in its definition¹. My three year old son stayed with my parents for a week, and he was being taught to swim in their swimming pool. Of course, I get sent pictures and clips of his progress by a proud grandma, and of course, him being a toddler, he felt swimming trunks to be completely optional (and of course, they are at his…
I mean that's cute and all, but why are your parents taking pictures of naked children and publishing them online? That's making assumptions about the channel used to send them and the phone itself being secure. Better to not risk it - not because of this legislation, but because of anyone else that might be listening in.
Have you not actually read anything about the post ?