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

EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

tutanota.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 431 posts

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#121

Post by kayodelycaon »

belter wrote: post #62
SamuelAdams wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a movie called Minority Report that had a similar premise. Basically they would detect murders before they happened and arrest people moments before the murder took place. At the time of the arrest the potential killer had motive and intent, so that’s how they justified it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)?wprov=s...

The movie was a warning: "UK police are using AI to predict who could become violent criminals" https://thenextweb.com/news/uk-police-are-using-ai-to-predic...

Ah yes, another skin color detector.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#122

Post by emteycz »

chinathrow wrote: post #79
zosima wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, as this is not about child sex abuse anyway. The legislators know, from experience, that it's hard to argue against measures to protect children from predators, and so they are free to launch controversial and unacceptable measures. Once in place, it will be extended to other purposes. The same as always.

> The same as always. Do you have a guess about who is behind that lasting global push against private communications?

Why does it have to be a somebody?

It's almost every politician since the invention of privacy. It's not a cabal, they just have common goals.

Edit: can't reply. The endgame is control over the population - taxing them, imprisoning them, etc. Why? I don't know, some people just like to be in (absolute) power.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#123

Post by conradfr »

puszczyk wrote: post #38
sharken wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

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.

Imposed by governments that miraculously took all the same measures at the same time (except Sweden, somehow).

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#124

Post by londons_explore »

zosima wrote: post #74
Freak_NL wrote: post #47

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…

Don't worry, as this is not about child sex abuse anyway. The legislators know, from experience, that it's hard to argue against measures to protect children from predators, and so they are free to launch controversial and unacceptable measures. Once in place, it will be extended to other purposes. The same as always.

The thing is, with current 'privacy-protecting scanner' designs, the scanner is running on every end users device, and it would be fairly simple for an expert to dump out the list of things being looked for.

That in turn makes such a system far less useful to intelligence services and authoritarian regimes. You don't want to tell your target that you're looking for them and which keywords not to use!

I wonder if this is part one, and then a later revision will require centralised scanning rather than on-device scanning.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#125

Post by me_me_me »

zosima wrote: post #74
Freak_NL wrote: post #47

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…

Don't worry, as this is not about child sex abuse anyway. The legislators know, from experience, that it's hard to argue against measures to protect children from predators, and so they are free to launch controversial and unacceptable measures. Once in place, it will be extended to other purposes. The same as always.

> Don't worry...

Unless you are going through a nasty divorce and you future ex starts throwing accusations of you keeping and constantly watching those videos.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#127

Post by foverzar »

searchableguy wrote: post #2

Could push for increasing surveillance be related to the recent adoption of digital social credit, CBDC (digital currency), and predictive policy systems in EU countries such as itlay, Netherlands, denmark, and the US? You would need a continous stream of data for building those. It makes a lot of sense if you look at it as countries trying to replicate success of Chinese growth and systems which are highly centraliz…

> trying to replicate success of Chinese growth and systems which are highly centralized and depend on the above factors

There are actually no such functioning "social credit" systems in China. It is mostly a boogeyman narrative.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#128

Post by hulitu »

chinathrow wrote: post #79
zosima wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, as this is not about child sex abuse anyway. The legislators know, from experience, that it's hard to argue against measures to protect children from predators, and so they are free to launch controversial and unacceptable measures. Once in place, it will be extended to other purposes. The same as always.

> The same as always. Do you have a guess about who is behind that lasting global push against private communications?

Your government who wants to control you. Or do you still think that data is collected just so that Google can give you more ads ?

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#129

Post by GordonS »

marsRoverDev wrote: post #117
Freak_NL wrote: post #47

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…

My understanding of this technology was it was usually a hash or fingerprint of some form of the material, to be compared against a database of hashes of known-bad material. I doubt EU countries have the infrastructure or budget to run models across everything, no?

An article about this was posted yesterday, and the EU wants to take it further that detecting known CSAM content, using AI to detect new content too.

Of course, it's all a pretence for getting access to read all of your data. It might be a language thing, but the wording of the report was such that they were almost stating this explicitly.

Honestly, what.the.hell are these clowns thinking?!

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#130

Post by Tade0 »

pantalaimon wrote: post #34
Tade0 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather ban (too) dense cities. Nobody needs to live at a density of 10k+ people per square kilometre .

Why? It's the most efficient use of resources and allows for some great cultural and public infrastructure to exist that just doesn't make sense without density.

Is efficiency for the sake of efficiency worth it though?

There's a second order effect I observed which I feel isn't discussed enough: when it's assumed that you can only walk/cycle or perhaps take the bus in an area, suddenly there's an additional premium imposed on space.

The net result is accelerated gentrification.

Anecdata: just about anyone I know from my generation was priced out of those walkable districts with access to public transportation they grew up in - simply because investors are aware of what is in demand, so they put all their money there and not into places you can only reliably access via car.

What follows is people buying not homes, but apartments built in the middle of buttfuck nowhere and driving to/from there, because that's what they can afford.

A net negative, but here we are.

I'm all for livable cities, but what good is it if the only ones who can afford it are the 1%?

Post reply on HN