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

The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

mastodon.online

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 300 posts

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#241

Post by AlecSchueler »

bregma wrote: post #232
AlecSchueler wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I draw a naked stick figure with boobs and say it is 14, is that morally wrong? At what point should a person care? No and I'm sure every judge in Britain would throw that case out. > Their point is that a drawing doesn't hurt people right? It can in certain circumstances encourage a market or normalise abusive behaviour.

> It can in certain circumstances encourage a market or normalise abusive behaviour. Just like the printed word. Books should be banned and burned. We should start with Orwell since his writing has been used as a manual for so much abusive behaviour.

Hate speech is also illegal in the UK, yes.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#242

Post by AlecSchueler »

FpUser wrote: post #211
AlecSchueler wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I draw a naked stick figure with boobs and say it is 14, is that morally wrong? At what point should a person care? No and I'm sure every judge in Britain would throw that case out. > Their point is that a drawing doesn't hurt people right? It can in certain circumstances encourage a market or normalise abusive behaviour.

>"It can in certain circumstances encourage..." Anything can be bad in "certain circumstances". They should go get busy with some real crime.

> Anything can be bad in "certain circumstances"

Can it? In the same way? It feels like your argument comes down to handwaving. Circumstantial law is hardly a novel thing.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#243

Post by snovv_crash »

yoan9224 wrote: post #138

The cycle of proposing the same surveillance legislation under different names is exhausting. Chat Control, ProtectEU, Going Dark - same invasive proposals, different branding. What's particularly concerning is the metadata retention scope: "which websites you visit, and who is communicating with whom, when and how often" with "the broadest possible scope of application" including VPN services. This isn't about prote…

The other way would be to ruin the career prospects of any politicians that put their name behind this.

Name and shame via a broad media campaign. It only has to happen a few times for nobody to want to propose this kind of thing anymore.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#244

Post by samus »

scotty79 wrote: post #206
elestor wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it makes a lot of sense. It likely encourages pedophilia, meaning people that consume such things will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay. It's similar to the way that regular porn affects the brain. I understand where you're coming from, though and I get your point, but I feel if someone consumes a lot of media of a certain type, they begin to 'embody' that media. Just don't goon.

> It likely encourages pedophilia Throught the same mechanism that violent games encourage violence, I presume? Porn became abundant over last two decades and somehow people are having less sex than ever. There are many clues that those kinds of things work in the completely opposite way than you imagine. I hate that it exists. I hate that there are people who are seeking this. But I also hate when people state confi…

> Porn became abundant over last two decades and somehow people are having less sex than ever.

That sounds like an actual negative effect, if there is actually causation. But I'd argue social media has overall a much more general influence by putting our whole lives into a panopticon. It is very hard to escape its reach even if one is not a social media user.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#245

Post by samus »

delusional wrote: post #182
Jigsy wrote: post #153

The problem with "child abuse" is that some countries classify drawing things as "child abuse," or "rape," or "animal abuse." (Something I don't agree with.) I mentioned in another thread a few weeks back that I got raided by the British police last February for "uploading/downloading "illegal" anime artwork on one of the (anime) artwork websites we're criminally investigating." (Yes, the British police are criminall…

I can't really connect what you're saying here. I understand that you think drawing loli (I imagine) shouldn't be classified as pedophelia, but what does the law say? Part of living in a society is compromise. I don't believe that certain stretches of road close to my home should have a 50kph speed limit, but when I get a ticket I also accept that I'm in the wrong. If you're of the opinion that drawing children havin…

> If you're of the opinion that drawing children having sex (assuming again) shouldn't be illegal, you should be lobbying/advocating for that position. Changing the compromise. Otherwise you're, like me driving too fast, at the mercy of the justice system.

That only makes sense if your general stance to everything is "forbidden unless explicitly permitted". I hope I don't have to say why that sounds oppressive.

There is more than one way to achieve a compromise in society.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#246

Post by spwa4 »

csomar wrote: post #223
Telaneo wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious what would happen if you pointed the relevant authorities at any decently sized store selling manga. There's got to be at least one stereotypical sexualised 4000 year old loli vampire or whatever in there. The sad truth is probably that they'd just shrug their arms and do nothing, since the surveillance and harassment is the point, and not even upholding the letter of the law, and much less its spirit.

The people in the system have to do something to justify the existence of such a system and bump their metrics. Whether someone did something bad or not is irrelevant. It is the job of the prosecution lawyers to figure out the grounds. Legality and culpability is a paperwork. Of course, if someone is rich and powerful (ehm, epsty, ehm) then the whole system will look the other way around. At least until it's impossib…

Is that why the fact that getting essentially every LLM to produce sexualized stereotypes is trivially easy, yet getting zero attention from these guys?

Or, much more long-running than the LLM "loophole": there's entire "channels" on Social Media, like Tiktok and Facebook Instagram Reels and Signal and Whatsapp and Telegram and ... that post essentially nothing but that, and no reaction.

https://www.tiktok.com/@modelagencyai/video/7225020868131294...

But what I find most criminal about these systems is that they're all about catching. These people never touch what happens when they "catch" someone. What happens, of course, is that they usually can't do anything about people actually spreading these images, but they can arrest the minors involved and lock them up long term in a terrible system. Of course, that system is horrible and is getting further defunded every year, including 2025. But that is where these children they "help" end up. And they don't care at all.

You care about children and victims of child abuse? How about we start with improving the living conditions of the actual known victims? Instead we see regular scandals about the child services system itself abusing children. Rotherham, Romania, child services involvement in Ukraine, Hungary, "toeslagenaffaire", the Netherland's youth services approving foster parents who literally only wanted to torture a young girl (and ignoring her pleas for help), ...

Frankly, if that isn't done first, I refuse to believe there is any real intent to help these children.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#247

Post by uyzstvqs »

yoan9224 wrote: post #138

The cycle of proposing the same surveillance legislation under different names is exhausting. Chat Control, ProtectEU, Going Dark - same invasive proposals, different branding. What's particularly concerning is the metadata retention scope: "which websites you visit, and who is communicating with whom, when and how often" with "the broadest possible scope of application" including VPN services. This isn't about prote…

"Going Dark" is perhaps the most honest and realistic branding yet, on multiple levels.

We're going into the darkness of authoritarianism, and as a result we'll have to go dark to communicate freely and privately. It's also a perfect description of Europe's fear-based decelerationist attitude towards technological innovation, and how we're fully dependent on outside countries for technology as a result.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#248

Post by ranyume »

forty wrote: post #189
Jigsy wrote: post #153

The problem with "child abuse" is that some countries classify drawing things as "child abuse," or "rape," or "animal abuse." (Something I don't agree with.) I mentioned in another thread a few weeks back that I got raided by the British police last February for "uploading/downloading "illegal" anime artwork on one of the (anime) artwork websites we're criminally investigating." (Yes, the British police are criminall…

If those countries have laws against making and consuming pedophile pictures and drawings (or "artwork"), I feel it's perfectly fine for people making and consuming those to be raided, even if they disagree with the law (if people could opt out of all laws they don't agree with, I'mnot sure what would be the point of making laws). What is not ok is to watch the activities of everyone who is not a pedophile in order t…

I read this as "It's perfectly fine to persecute people for their art". And boy, you're on the wrong side of history.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#249

Post by ranyume »

elestor wrote: post #195
vbezhenar wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of criminalising hand-made pictures? I just don't understand it. I could understand the point of criminalising child porn photos, as producing these photos obviously requires violating other laws (actually not obviously, as you can dress adult actors to look like children, but whatever). But things that are obviously drawn without any involvement of real children, what's wrong with them? Just keep th…

I'd say it makes a lot of sense. It likely encourages pedophilia, meaning people that consume such things will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay. It's similar to the way that regular porn affects the brain. I understand where you're coming from, though and I get your point, but I feel if someone consumes a lot of media of a certain type, they begin to 'embody' that media. Just don't goon.

> will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay

I wonder who gets to decide what's okay.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#250

Post by ranyume »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #217
elestor wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it makes a lot of sense. It likely encourages pedophilia, meaning people that consume such things will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay. It's similar to the way that regular porn affects the brain. I understand where you're coming from, though and I get your point, but I feel if someone consumes a lot of media of a certain type, they begin to 'embody' that media. Just don't goon.

> It likely encourages pedophilia It's like saying that pictures of gay people encourages homosexuality

I like this parallel. No joke intended.
Post reply on HN