• skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    What you see is also in part how the EU legislative process operates. There are very very long backs and forwards within the commission and with the committees, with proposals that sometimes improve and sometimes worsen (this particular one is an absolute disaster), until some form of consensus is reached.

    There simply is an agreement that something should be done about the online distribution of CSAM, and so they’ll keep coming up with new ideas until something gives, or someone manages to spread the idea that simply nothing should be done about it.

    The most effective way to fight this might be to build consensus around a less criminally insane way to do this.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      The most effective way to fight this might be to build consensus around a less criminally insane way to do this.

      There fundamentally is no less criminally insane way to do this. After WW2, there was a consensus in germany to not surveil its own citizens (as had happened during the Nazi times). This EU proposal goes starkly against that, and seemingly ignores all of the other blatant problems. The EU commission gets paid a shitload of money per year sothat they make meaningful proposals. This is hardly it. They need to prove they’re worth their salt by doing basic thinking and figuring out that such a proposal as is now on the table is not even worth being discussed, it should be discarded immediately.

      • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        There is fundamentally no less criminally insane way to combat the circulation of CSAM? Then the council may have a point after all…

        • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          actually i don’t think the council has a point

          There simply is an agreement that something should be done about the online distribution of CSAM

          For the protection of children, it’s essential that nobody makes money by distributing CSAM, because where money is to be made, somebody will do it. This calls for regulations on payment processors to ensure no illegal businesses are served by them.

          Fortunately, AI kinda solves this because just like artists can’t sell art anymore if AI spits out more content at practically no cost, neither can CSAM be sold if AI spits it out at practically no cost. As such, the business dries out. And that’s what matters.