Telegram repeatedly refused to join child protection schemes - eviltoast
  • PumaStoleMyBluff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    They could at least do on-device hash lookups and prevent sending. Has zero effect on privacy and does reduce CSAM.

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yah, that would be a great solution in comparison, but it’s still privacy invasive. Not as bad, but it’s still not giving people due process.

      Which, not everywhere in the world recognizes that principle as a right, I am aware. But I do consider due process a right, and scanning anything on anyone’s devices without a legally justifiable reason is a violation of that.

      I’m not willing to kowtow to a moral panic and just ignore the erosion of privacy “because the children”. And it is a moral panic. As bad as it is, as much as I personally would enjoy five minutes alone with someone that’s making or using kiddie porn of any stripe, it simply isn’t such a common thing that stripping everyone of their privacy, in any way is acceptable.

      They wanna figure out a way to target individuals suspected of that kind of crime, awesome. Untargeted, sweeping invasions simply are not acceptable, and I do not care what the purported reason of the week is; kiddie porn, terrorism, security, stopping drugs, I do not care. I have committed no crime, and refuse to give away the presumption of innocence for myself or anyone else.