• fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    155
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Taking away privacy makes it easier for children to be abused.

    Remember, the most likely abusers of children are not strangers off the Internet; they’re people who have authority over those children: parents, church leaders, teachers, coaches, police, etc.

    In other words, these laws are not “fighting pedophilia”. They are enabling child abuse.

    • masquenox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      11 months ago

      In other words, these laws are not “fighting pedophilia”. They are enabling child abuse.

      So no different than all these laws that (supposedly) “stop sex trafficking” which only exist to clamp down on sex work while… drumroll… making absolutely no dent in actual sex trafficking?

      Yeah… that tracks.

    • brewbellyblueberry@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      On top of all that, I wonder how much the types of backports they’re rooting for would be used to acquire the kind of material pedophiles are after. I mean kids will be kids either way and be stupid and the people that are after kiddie porn seem more likely the type of people to know their way around and stay hidden, because they’re literally predators. These backports will be abused by both “the legitimate” side and criminals, so wouldn’t having a “special key” to unlock your backdoor put your children in more danger, especially when you’re sleeping sound thinking you’re safe and therefore not worried about someone, “breaking in”. (Is it still breaking in if they have a fucking key?)

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t really see your point. There would still be private communication, it would just not be private in the eyes of the law anymore. Wouldn’t make it easier for abusers to abuse.

      Or did I just miss something?

      • fubo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago
        1. Backdoors in consumer software cannot in fact be restricted to “legitimate” use. All it takes is one “bad apple” to leak the keys – say, a radicalized police officer leaking them to a fascist group for use in harassing political opponents – and those keys show up on the darknet and are directly available to abusers. This is a much larger threat than (e.g.) traditional landline telephone wiretapping.
        2. If secure communication systems are made illegal, the organizations that build those systems (e.g. Signal) will shut down so as not to be prosecuted for “enabling child abuse”. This deprives their current users, including children, of the secure communication systems they are already using today.
        3. Sadly, law enforcement officers abuse their power quite often. They also have a higher rate of domestic abuse than the general population. Giving them power to spy on children’s communication is directly enabling abusers.
        • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Fair points. Yet those backdoors already exist for a long time now (prism et al). There are alternatives which are, and probably will be safer with the new laws. Maybe illegal then, but safe®. Also there are always zerodays to purchase.

          Whomever uses whatapp and other typical murican company-messengers (or whateever else) is already under surveillance. Maybe just no yet in the EU.

          Not saying it can’t get worse. It sure could.

          Thanks for making your point clearer.

          • thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You do realise data miners have been ripping WhatsApp to pieces to find traces of a back door for years right?

            Nothing has ever come up.

            I hate Meta as much as the next person, but when they say the messages are end to end encrypted they do mean it. Otherwise the backdoor would’ve certainly been found by now. Signal, iMessage and Telegram are the same.

            Sure this isn’t true for anything like Twitter DMs but for the ones that are end to end encrypted nobody has found a backdoor.

            • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              You can’t be serious? WA got no US-Gov-backdoor? Yeah sure. I obviously can’t proove that they have, but i couldn’t think of a single reason why Meta and the likes shouldn’t neatly cooperate. Customers are sheeple anyway, they could name WA asshat-messenger and they’d still use it. They wouldn’t mind nor care. The gov (any gov) would surely show love.

              Besides that it’s closed source. They say E2E. But can I verify?

              So, you’re saying prism et al were just fakenews and govs don’t listen already? And it’s not just about those that really offer true, verifyable E2E?

              Not that i would care about meta & the likes, i don’t use that shit, but I’d be glad if I’d be wrong.

      • Isycius@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well. If you put a large glass window on the reinforced steel safe to make sure you can observe inside the safe. You can’t exactly expect criminals to not just smash window instantly to take everything instead of struggling to open the safe harder way.

        Making master key is also not the approach that works because unlike physical keys, digital keys can be copied millions of times exactly without any flaw over miliseconds without requiring any specialized tool on site.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    11 months ago

    Pedophiles would be terminally stupid if they used common, commercial chat systems and social media. Those who survive have probably their own forums completely disconnected from commercial prying eyes.

    So in the end they would only catch a handful of very stupid amateurs while trampling on the rights to privacy and confidentiality of all citizens.

    • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, the stupid ones get caught pretty easily. A professor at our local university was caught storing CP on a university network share.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        How the fuck did they even become a professor? I mean even school student in 8th grade would not be so stupid to put regular porn on their school or home network share.

        • King@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          By being good at studying? I hope this was sarcastic bro 😬

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I mean even school student in 8th grade would not be so stupid to put regular porn on their school or home network share. If this person more stupid at this, how stupid they are at teaching?

        • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’re highly overestimating the intelligence requirements to become a professor.

          Also, being well informed on a specific topic doesn’t mean you’re smart. My HS valedictorian is the dumbest person I’ve ever met. But, she was able to regurgitate information on tests without actually understanding any of it.

        • Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Why wouldn’t they be able to? It’s not like they walk around with brands on their foreheads that proclaim what they are, and most of them are regular people in the other aspects of their lives.

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I mean even school student in 8th grade would not be so stupid to put regular porn on their school or home network share. If they are more stupid at this than an 8th-grade, how bad they are at teaching?

            • tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              We had a guy at an old job who kept changing the permissions on his data to remove administrator access because he thought that would work. He wasn’t an idiot generally, he just didn’t understand how computers worked.

  • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    11 months ago

    For fighting pedos (or abusers in general) it would be way more helpful to fight it at the root, not the leafs.

    But it’s just a marketing-phrase to kill privacy, not fight abuse…

  • atrielienz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    11 months ago

    Does anybody but me remember top sites? Back in the day bootleggers would distribute and share ripped movies and albums on top sites for bootleggers to download and copy to disc or tape. Like. They didn’t use regular chats except to vet new people. They literally had their own chat networks. The same applies here. Like. Why do they think this will do anything much to make a dent in CP? We all know it won’t and it’s a poorly concealed attempt at destroying privacy laws.

  • DigitalFrank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    11 months ago

    You want to fight pedophilia, cut of the trafficking network at the head.

    Release the Epstein client list.

    They won’t, this is how you know it’s not about pedophilia, it’s about further invasion of privacy and more monitoring of the peasants.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think they’re just trying to get reelected by eliciting primal emotions.

        They could go after the Epstein people, but that would upset the (terrible)status quo.

  • magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    So, a better title might be “Fighting privacy under the guise of fighting pedophelia: The EU rule that could break the internet”

  • catalog3115@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    To put pressure on the countries and persuade them to vote ‘yes’, the European Commission placed these ads only in countries that did not want to vote for the law: Sweden, Belgium, Finland, Slovenia, Portugal, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands Ads Ads Pic

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    The vast majority of politicians apparently refuse to understand - despite it being explained ad nauseum in a multitude of ways - that truly robust encryption with no “master key” or “back door” that the “good guys” can use is completely integral to and absolutely required for the modern internet to work at all.

  • deczzz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    And it will probably happen. No one in power gives a fuck about logic and reason. It’s all about sending a signal. People don’t care about privacy but they don’t like pedos!

    11 years ago, I attended a talk by Gottfrid Svartholm in Berlin. He told us that we have lost the internet. Pretty good foresight eh?