Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes • Hacker News Board

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#41

Post by Djdjur7373bb » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 7:08 AM UTC

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #33

sirspacey wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll take this bait. For those who have built or participated in building large scale social networks (nvm global scale), you learn the Tim Ferris rule very quickly: 1 in a million is a common occurrence. As soon as you have a social network you’ll experience a massive industry, trained over decades & with plenty of financial backers, farming it for victims. Government bodies are hand-waving in the same way companies…

> if you require your information systems to be crime & abuse free, you will not have an information system anyone can use. No one does and that’s not why Durov was arrested. It’s fine if there is crime on your system providing you are ready to work with law enforcement so that the space can be policed to the best of your ability. If you don’t, you are basically voluntarily harming society and will be prosecuted. I’m…

> I just opened Telegram right now to check and sure enough the third contact in people nearby right now is called “Weed, Coke, Viagra - Buy now”. At some point, if you don’t see the issue, I think you might be intentionally blind.

Or we just see these discussions as something that shouldn't be criminalized. I'm happy that those who wish to buy drugs can do so on a safer platform than the street corner.

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#42

Post by RandomThoughts3 » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 7:33 AM UTC

Djdjur7373bb wrote: post #41

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you require your information systems to be crime & abuse free, you will not have an information system anyone can use. No one does and that’s not why Durov was arrested. It’s fine if there is crime on your system providing you are ready to work with law enforcement so that the space can be policed to the best of your ability. If you don’t, you are basically voluntarily harming society and will be prosecuted. I’m…

> I just opened Telegram right now to check and sure enough the third contact in people nearby right now is called “Weed, Coke, Viagra - Buy now”. At some point, if you don’t see the issue, I think you might be intentionally blind. Or we just see these discussions as something that shouldn't be criminalized. I'm happy that those who wish to buy drugs can do so on a safer platform than the street corner.

Well then lobby for drugs to be legalised because arguing for free expression when you are actually sad that your drug dealer got busted is completely hypocritical.

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#43

Post by Djdjur7373bb » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 7:41 AM UTC

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #42

Djdjur7373bb wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just opened Telegram right now to check and sure enough the third contact in people nearby right now is called “Weed, Coke, Viagra - Buy now”. At some point, if you don’t see the issue, I think you might be intentionally blind. Or we just see these discussions as something that shouldn't be criminalized. I'm happy that those who wish to buy drugs can do so on a safer platform than the street corner.

Well then lobby for drugs to be legalised because arguing for free expression when you are actually sad that your drug dealer got busted is completely hypocritical.

Which part is hypocritical?

I do support drug legalization and decriminalization of all "victimless" crimes.

But I also realize that libertarian policies are unlikely to be adopted in today's political climate, so I also support technology that gets the government out of personal lives, regardless of the law.

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#44

Post by southernplaces7 » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 6:48 PM UTC

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #33

sirspacey wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll take this bait. For those who have built or participated in building large scale social networks (nvm global scale), you learn the Tim Ferris rule very quickly: 1 in a million is a common occurrence. As soon as you have a social network you’ll experience a massive industry, trained over decades & with plenty of financial backers, farming it for victims. Government bodies are hand-waving in the same way companies…

> if you require your information systems to be crime & abuse free, you will not have an information system anyone can use. No one does and that’s not why Durov was arrested. It’s fine if there is crime on your system providing you are ready to work with law enforcement so that the space can be policed to the best of your ability. If you don’t, you are basically voluntarily harming society and will be prosecuted. I’m…

>No one does and that’s not why Durov was arrested. It’s fine if there is crime on your system providing you are ready to work with law enforcement so that the space can be policed to the best of your ability. If you don’t, you are basically voluntarily harming society and will be prosecuted. I’m personally fine with that.

What you say is absurd because you're assuming that what the government requests for being "ready to work with law enforcement" is actually reasonable, fair and considerate to certain rights that most of western society ostensibly takes seriously. You assume that the measures proposed under the guise of protecting some vulnerable group won't be used for other much more self-serving things that also very much harm society.

Both of these assumptions are visibly false in so many cases of such state requests that you can't just be "fine" with that unless you flat out don't give a shit about people's fundamental rights against a powerful state.

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#45

Post by hulitu » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 8:32 PM UTC

southernplaces7 wrote: post #39

SXX wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's all true except 99% of Telegram is not encrypted by design and majority of content is publicly accessible to anyone with account I would agree with you if Telegram actually had e2ee like Signal. But it isn't. No encryption breaking required to moderate public content.

So wider encryption should be a requirement of resisting mass surveillance facilitation pushed in the name of "protecting children"? It's amazing how far so many people have gone towards normalizing the idea that the state, or some supranational organization in the case of the EU, deserves the right to simply be able to monitor and access reams of private communications and their media at its whim. Bad and criminal b…

When Stalin did it, it was good. When the "western" "democracies" do it, it is "to protect the children".

Re: Telegram repeatedly refuses to join child protection schemes

#46

Post by cowboylowrez » Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 9:15 PM UTC

amy-petrik-214 wrote: post #40

Hot take: the way to end CSAM (childhoods sexual abusing MPEGs (motion picture expert group) ) aka CP (childhood predator images) for those whom don't know the acronyms -- it is to legalize (((AI generatrated))) CSAM. No child harmed. As we see the internet is already full of AI slop, there can be no question that an infinite amount of CSAMslop may be generated. The reason why this is good, is because anyone looking…

whats the three parentheses mean? I've seen the two in bash, but rarely more than one in regular online chat.