Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Pushing Spyware Engine is literally abuse to all people including children and it's much worse then any problem they would claim to fight. Even if you believe them. >> It is an attempt to legalize such Spyware Engine installation. Nothing more. The story is just to sell this move using emotional response from naive people . >> Those people should be educated what the real abuse is and they should teach their child…
Yeah - fair point. I've over stated my position. I'll re-commit to "most" people criticizing. I will restate that regardless of the poor taste, it doesn't change the points validity. But you are correct. I did miss their minimization of the issue. Obviously due to my own bias.
Just wanted to point out a oft overlooked tidbit for the non-philodophers in the room.
Validity only conveys that an argument has proper form. There are many valid arguments that are nevertheless bull, because while they have valid structure, they do not follow from true premises. You should not be pursuing mere validity, but soundness. The state of having valid structure, and following from true premises. I also try to go for complete as well, meaning one has admitted all relevant evidence to the topic at hand, but that tends to be more of a rhetorical drawing of the line.
No one questions there are awful people out there. God only knows, I've had my share of of awful things found on computers I've been the steward for. At the end of the day though, I have to weigh my utility as a means of control and oppression against my normative moral compass and axiomatic underpinnings of how the world works. Mine tell me that there will never be a shortage of people willing to keep those people in check without handing to governments the foundations of population scale control mechanisms. The difficulty of mitigating a government in the process of abusing one of those is way higher than merely being a proactive when the situation warrants.
Solve problems at the level they are best solved. Centralization is almost never the answer except in questions enforcement of control, or applying leverage against someone else's will.
It might make me odd, but I can still look at something vile like CSAM scanning, and recognize it for what it is: violent non-consensual violation of what is expected to be private for the furthering of a small groups political aspirations.
I condemn this no less than I would dragnetting abolitionists, whistleblowers, revolutionaries, or other agents of change.
I assure you, there has been much sleep lost in contemplating whether my moral compass has gotten screwed over time. I don't take these issues lightly. I care about it so much that any doubt on my part is grounds for immediate high intensity scrutiny. Yet I keep coming to the same outcome. This. Is. Wrong. On so many levels, and in so many ways.