| |
| ▲ | chrisjj a day ago | parent [-] | | So it is going to report you for stuff it saw on your phone screen but you didn't? Then in the kids in bath situation, what offence is it reporting you for? Attempted CSAM? | | |
| ▲ | chrisjj a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > Again I don't think these people have thought this far. Agreed 100%. > If you have CSAM on your phone then clearly you must be a criminal, who cares how it got there /s The law cares. So it will be interesting to see how this is covered in formulation. | | |
| ▲ | gambiting a day ago | parent [-] | | >>The law cares Yes, the problem is that there were already cases where people were arrested for CP because they left their phone for repair and the tech reported them, they got swiped up from their home or work, spent months in jail waiting for trial, no one could look at the evidence because "it's CSAM", local newspapers posted that so and so were arrested for CP, they lost their jobs, and finally months later some prosecutor finally agreed to look at the evidence only to see the guy only had some pictures of his daughter in a paddling pool. Oops. Yeah, the law cared. The law released them, maybe even apologized. But by that point your life is over, if you haven't just killed yourself over the accusation of being one of the worst people ever. | | |
| |
| ▲ | gambiting a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Again I don't think these people have thought this far. If you have CSAM on your phone then clearly you must be a criminal, who cares how it got there /s The entire rationale they seem to offer is - to quote the article - "these companies make trillions of dollars, they can easily implement this". It's like saying that since Google makes trillions of dollars they can easily land on Mars, after all money solves all problems including physics. |
|
|
