Looks like France is enforcing chat control 2.0 a bit prematurely.
The EU council is meeting to discuss it again on October 10. A new vote is likely in mid-December. Many parties and countries have turned their coat to support the proposal.
I have not followed this at all. Seems okay at face value. Is that the point, that “protect the kids” a is pretext to creep towards eventual screening of everything?
The meme says the big internet companies are already doing this. Isn’t it a legit problem that this sort of harmful child sexual abuse material just moves around the internet like whack-a-mole?
The Democratic nations of the world have all gone to Telegram and begged for help to address human trafficking, to address terrorism, to literally prevent wars, and they are told to fuck off. Seems criminal to me.
I think you got the point. Criminals use the same services as the rest of us. CSAM is being used as pretext to outlaw or bypass end-to-end encryption.
It’s a noble cause, but it puts all of us in a vulnerable position. As post-communist countries know from past experience, once these measures are in place the next government will use it for surveillance of all kind when it’s their turn.
Yes, I know. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. I’m not doing anything illegal at the toilet, but I still prefer to keep the door closed - even if I’m home alone.
Chat control 1.0 has been voluntarily inplemented by big platforms, but it has not been fruitful. Lots of false positives and not enough resources to look at the true positives. The delegates preparing this have demonstrated poor technical understanding.
Whistleblowers won’t have confidence in anonymity. A journalist asked the author (Ylva Johansson) of the proposal if he, as a journalist, would still be able to receive tips from whistleblowers with secrecy. She stumbled ln her answer and said that CSAM should be illegal.
Police and officials are of course exempt from chat control 2.0. Secrecy for me, but not for thee.
.
.
Looks like France is enforcing chat control 2.0 a bit prematurely.
The EU council is meeting to discuss it again on October 10. A new vote is likely in mid-December. Many parties and countries have turned their coat to support the proposal.
The fight is not over.
I have not followed this at all. Seems okay at face value. Is that the point, that “protect the kids” a is pretext to creep towards eventual screening of everything?
The meme says the big internet companies are already doing this. Isn’t it a legit problem that this sort of harmful child sexual abuse material just moves around the internet like whack-a-mole?
The Democratic nations of the world have all gone to Telegram and begged for help to address human trafficking, to address terrorism, to literally prevent wars, and they are told to fuck off. Seems criminal to me.
What should be criminal is forcing private citizens to act as police officers and throwing them in jail if they refuse.
I think you got the point. Criminals use the same services as the rest of us. CSAM is being used as pretext to outlaw or bypass end-to-end encryption.
It’s a noble cause, but it puts all of us in a vulnerable position. As post-communist countries know from past experience, once these measures are in place the next government will use it for surveillance of all kind when it’s their turn.
Yes, I know. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. I’m not doing anything illegal at the toilet, but I still prefer to keep the door closed - even if I’m home alone.
Chat control 1.0 has been voluntarily inplemented by big platforms, but it has not been fruitful. Lots of false positives and not enough resources to look at the true positives. The delegates preparing this have demonstrated poor technical understanding.
Whistleblowers won’t have confidence in anonymity. A journalist asked the author (Ylva Johansson) of the proposal if he, as a journalist, would still be able to receive tips from whistleblowers with secrecy. She stumbled ln her answer and said that CSAM should be illegal.
Police and officials are of course exempt from chat control 2.0. Secrecy for me, but not for thee. . .