441–450 of 597 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple is very much like WhatsApp. Yes you cant perfectly trust their E2EE against state actors, but both in fact put some effort into making world have little bit more privacy. They probably use E2EE just so they don't have to respond to court orders and such.
Like when Google got tired of handling geofencing warrants.
I know creating a throwaway to hide your name for an opinion is a bad manner, but this one is one I really don’t want linked back to me The VAST majority of “CSAM” is consensually created and exchanged by teens. Their future selves and their parents form this pressure group attacking everyone’s liberty and privacy to try to undo the downsides of choices they made themselves with full knowledge of what could happen. T…
I think you’re right, but from another angle. In the state where I lived way back when, a state representative put forth a bill to explicitly make e-CSAM illegal. I guess it was already illegal for print media and this covered a gap in the law about cell phone pics, etc. Thing is, it had no allowance for the age of the picture taker, or even whether the picture taker was the photo subject. If a 16 year old girl took…
This is weird indeed. These bills are mostly put forward in order to appear tough on crime and secure votes of the naive population ("think of the children"). Pulling the bill is detrimental as it may lead to "pedo supporter" conspiracy spreading among the district.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is on the side of privacy, except when you want privacy from Apple: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself (theregister.com) 161 points by Logans_Run on Feb 14, 2025 | 69 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43047952 Apple silently uploads your passwords and keeps them (lapcatsoftware.com) 170 points by ingve on Nov 1, 2024 | 127 comments And whenever your priv…
It's telling that these come from people trying to implement tracking and high visibility into user behavior, and complaining that Apple won't let them even though Apple conceptually could. Except ublock, which can't do what it does the way it normally does, for the same reason you can't have any plugin inspecting realtime activity and doing scriptlet injection. You can have ad blocking. You can't have plugins with t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> one can be convicted of CSAM-related crimes related to paintings/drawings/created_art of fictional people. This isn't necessarily the case in the US, though I believe only for drawings. AI-generated CSAM probably wouldn't fly in a court of law. Regardless, it's a naive conception of a system of law to think of it as a utilitarian system of restitution in contexts of "this individual harmed this individual". In fact…
For drawings it has to additionally be "obscene" (since obscenity isn't protected by the first amendment). And there is also a specific law that criminalizes even non-obscene realistic computer generated imagery.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that old canard is ridiculous! I mean, if there were any truth to it, surely our nation would have seen an uptick, in the past 30–40 years, of new generations picking up guns and just mercilessly mowing down soft targets as if playing GTA. Thankfully, that is all confined to fantasy in cyberspace!
school shootings happen when lonely boys with mental health issues a) have access to guns and b) feel like society failed them and they need to take revenge. the first one is the reason why it happens it america more than any other place. other countries also have youth unemployment and social isolation but they show up as bullying in schools or votes for fascist parties instead of mass murder. the actual problem is…
you mean anyone who isn't 100% all-in on globalism?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I still don’t want to throw kids in prison or remove all traces of a right to privacy in our haste to sun-yeet them. The one messy corner of this is the "strict liability" for this type of material. An underage kid can take a nude photo, send it to an adult, and then the adult can criminally liable for just having it, even if he deleted it as soon as he saw it. Either both parties involved in handing something for…
IANAL, but the notion of "strict liability" horrified me when I first head of it, and I thought it had to be some kind of a misunderstanding. So we're tossing that "innocent until proven guilty" idea out the window, huh? I'm sure smarter people than me have sussed this out and can explain why it's a good thing, but it sits wrong with me. We can put the subject matter aside for a second: I don't think I could convict…
We sure do. Legislators who pushed this "strict liability" thing forward were playing "tough on crime" for the audience of naive voters. Now anyone who tries to change this will commit political suicide and achieve the "pedo supporter" title.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But crucially: > However, the court did not reverse its holding in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition as to virtual child pornography which is not obscene under the Miller standard
> virtual child pornography which is not obscene Does it surprise anyone else that this is a legal possibility?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm taking a guess at what the OP meant, but people focus on assault rifles and high-capacity magazines. Supposedly most incidents and deaths are caused by handguns. They're more affordable, and easy to discretely keep on your person. A data-driven policy would focus on them first, but it's easier to rile up the public about AR-15s so we keep doing the less-effective thing.
When we say that handguns cause more deaths than assault rifles, is that normalized towards ownership? Data and statistics is as always dependent on how and what you measure.
So the number of hanguns is maybe something like 20% higher than long guns, but murders using handguns are 10x higher than with long guns.
https://www.thetrace.org/2023/03/guns-america-data-atf-total...
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, until at least one non-ringleader Epstein party participant goes to jail, I'm not going to believe the US actually gives a shit about protecting children.
Every president since Clinton protected epstein too, it's not a partisan thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that old canard is ridiculous! I mean, if there were any truth to it, surely our nation would have seen an uptick, in the past 30–40 years, of new generations picking up guns and just mercilessly mowing down soft targets as if playing GTA. Thankfully, that is all confined to fantasy in cyberspace!
school shootings happen when lonely boys with mental health issues a) have access to guns and b) feel like society failed them and they need to take revenge. the first one is the reason why it happens it america more than any other place. other countries also have youth unemployment and social isolation but they show up as bullying in schools or votes for fascist parties instead of mass murder. the actual problem is…