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

251–260 of 300 posts

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

#251

Post by numlock86 »

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…

> this is honestly going to get much worse

Just like with Brexit, the majority of UK's population voted (and will keep voting) for this.

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

#252

Post by Jigsy »

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.

> meaning people that consume such things will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay.

I've been reading "illegal" manga for 20 years. I've never once thought that these acts would be okay to do in real life.

Same when I read the 1906 novel Josephine Mutzenbacher.

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

#253

Post by troyvit »

PopePompus wrote: post #240
SiempreViernes wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure Google and meta are the ones that normalised mass surveillance...

Mass surveillance by corporations, bad as it is, is less of a threat than mass surveillance by the government. Google can't put you in prison.

They can't put you in jail, but they will often happily sell your data to the government so that they can put you in jail [1], and by holding the data they are now open to subpoenas anyway.

Additionally, making surveillance by corporations the norm they've eroded everybody's reasonable expectation of privacy, which is the standard by which U.S. courts judge if surveillance has gone too far. Now that we're all used to this level of corporate surveillance we won't blink when the government does it too.

IOW if corporations weren't hoarding this data governments would have a much harder time securing it.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/us-government-buys-dat...

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

#254

Post by AlanYx »

I'm not criticizing the content of this post, but the author is likely wrong about this specific initiative being called "Going Dark".

"Going Dark" has been the umbrella term various worldwide intelligence orgs have been using since the mid-2010s to describe their lack of access to encrypted communications. For example, here's FBI Director James Comey using the term in 2014: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/watch-fbi-director-james-... It's a coordinated broad branding effort by intelligence agencies across the west, but I doubt that this specific EU initiative itself has ever been called "Going Dark" even internally.

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

#255

Post by Jigsy »

latentsea wrote: post #234
Jigsy wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've don't use Tor. I've never had a reason to. All the artwork websites I access are publically accessible artwork websites.

Publically accessible doesn't necessarily mean legal.

They're all long established websites. The oldest one I have an account on (and use to get posters) is 2007.

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

#256

Post by brabel »

flir wrote: post #239
brabel wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What evidence do you have that it absolutely doesn't? I think it’s very obvious when looking at the last 20 years. Porn availability increased ridiculously since around 2000 due to internet becoming widespread. But look at statistics on rape in most countries and you see its decreasing in the large majority. Does that not convince you that at least there seems to be no causation??

https://www.statista.com/statistics/283100/recorded-rape-off... https://www.statista.com/statistics/191137/reported-forcible... https://www.statista.com/statistics/1464272/reported-sexual-... https://www.statista.com/statistics/1418831/sexual-offences-... I realise I respond to a stupid argument. I'm just annoyed.

You cherry picked a few outliers. Here’s a chart showing many countries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rape_in_the_Unite...

It’s clearly going down in most places, including the USA.

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

#258

Post by deltoidmaximus »

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…

> Should they have cameras in every room of your home just in case?

Given that most children are abused by some one they know that might actually be a more effective way to prevent it than whatever they're doing here. I'm sure they'll get to that eventually.

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

#259

Post by elestor »

JacWpthrowaway wrote: post #216
brabel wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure there is evidence that this is the case. The argument sounds a lot like those made by conservatives against gay people. Somehow, in their view, homosexuality is also just a first step towards “anything goes”, including incest, pedophilia, even bestiality. Porn, in this view, should increase rape, right? But that’s absolutely not the case. People seem to calm down if they can satisfy themselves with just…

> Porn, in this view, should increase rape, right? But that’s absolutely not the case. What evidence do you have that it absolutely doesn't? How would you even scientifically prove this? There are a whole lot of factors that contribute to rape or rape prevention. Does modern sexual objectification and gratification increase the likelyhood that men will seek to actualize their fantasies? I believe it does. From my own…

Exactly, people will watch porn videos of girls being choked or whatever, will be with a girl and assume she will like being choked. Not okay at all.

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

#260

Post by elestor »

ranyume wrote: post #249
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.

> will often adopt a wrong idea of what's okay I wonder who gets to decide what's okay.

Basic morality and human rights
Post reply on HN