Meine Lieblingstasse hat übrigens die Aufschrift:

"Morgens Kaffee,
Abends Handgranaten"

In diesem Sinne (ganz unabhängig vom "Gender" der Figur):

@islieb
Männer, die die Welt verbrennen, gab es schon als Buch von @chrisstoecker:

Stöcker, Christian. Männer, die die Welt verbrennen: Der entscheidende Kampf um die Zukunft der Menschheit. Ullstein, 2024.

Leider wirklich sehr realistisch.

@ranx
Thanks to the use of good-guys-only backdoor, because that's totally a possible thing that exists. Yeah, right. 🙄

#chatControl

But you expect us to believe there'll be no scope-creep?

What about the "AI" scanning of all messages on the client-side, whose security impications are so bad that all politicians and all military personnel are exempt?

This is mass surveillance. Firstly, it's an enormous treasure-trove of data, that will inevitably be breached.
Secondly, abuse of it by those controlling it is inevitable. And even in the unlikely event that it isn't actively used for identifying and suppressing dissent, the prospect will cause people to self-censor.

The Stasi would have wet themselves at the possibilities.

Every subject-matter expert on every aspect of this has called it out as horrifying, and pointed out comprehensively that it cannot and will not accomplish its stated goals.

Its supporters are AI and surveillance enterprises who stand to gain financially.

So let me be clear: there is nothing necessary or proportionate about this. The only fair resolution is to scrap the whole proposal.

@ranx I'm happy to see you respond to critical comments!

You can't detect illegal materials inside a message without accessing the message contents. Whether you AI-scan the message contents before they are sent or break the encryption afterwards, it will have very negative consequences.

There are many govt and non-govt organisations protecting children and they tend to be woefully underfunded. Please consider funding them instead of focusing on broken ideas.

@ranx the only way to detect the sought content is to collect and analyse all content.

The carve out for politicians makes it obvious.

as a little privacy advocate let us break it down one by one

"Let us be clear: under this proposal, there is no general monitoring of online communications. There will be no such thing as “chat control”."

wanna know what the definition of insanity is? Step aside far cry 3 character, we got a new champ on the block (1/4)

That might work on evenint news, but not around here.

Phony shit. Just what we‘re used from your fine president.

@ranx

"Only material that is clearly child sexual abuse will be searched for and can be detected."

Whoever is responsible for this “response” deserves a raise for their outstanding achievements in bullshitting Europeans. The above quote sounds benign and harmless, but in reality it means the following:

Every message *may* contain child abuse content, therefore every message will be scanned.

@ranx

No, YOU be clear. You are going to use AI for so-called "child protection". Which hell on earth in-progress did you take inspiration from? USA? Russia? UK?

You have no spine. Grow one.

You clearly have no understanding of IT, encryption, detection algorithms. Your proposal will lead to massive false positives, privacy violations, and is a great basis for mass surveillance.

I want a strong Europe which protects freedom of people, improves prosperity of all Europeans, protects our environment, and protects our democracy.

However if Europe goes the way of this proposal, I'll become a strong and vocal opponent of the EU. And I won't be the only one.

@ranx

@ranx IT is not magic!

If you want to detect whether a given message contains CSAM you obviously *have* to let it be scanned by some detection algorithm / machine learning. Otherwise you simply can't know...

In other words *each and every* message would have to be exposed to the threat of false positives. It is completely outrageous that you try to pretend otherwise!

#chatcontrol

@ranx

I have a question about: "Only material that is clearly child sexual abuse will be searched for and can be detected."

How? How will one determine when it's "sexual abuse" on all media? One has to scan each and every single media file to find these, I do not see any other way

Don't get me wrong, I would love a better way to deal with CSAM content but scanning all to find the few is not the way

@ranx

> under this proposal, there is no general monitoring of online communications

There will be a monitoring of every single picture and every single link in every single piece of online communication. Every message will need to be scanned for the presence of links and images. That's very different to "no general monitoring".

What you describe is technologically impossible.

Source: Me, cybersecurity professional.

@ranx

Hey! A massive thank you for engaging here. That is wonderful, and everybody involved is beautiful 😀

On the chatcontrol topic, unfortunately the messaging is not correct. The whole IT industry is very concerned (as we know, that is the highest level of concern) about chatcontrol for a good reason. We know it is impossible to implement it in a secure way that is not abused.

How could this message best be relayed to the commission that does not involve harassing them in person?

What you should be doing instead is to make it both easy and legal to report CSAM. For example, people moderating Mastodon instances hosted out of Germany must immediately delete any CSAM the find without reporting, because if you report, it's proving "possession" which comes which a 11 year minimum prison sentence.

What you need to build up is easy reporting like the USA has, and fund sufficient staff to actually deal with the reports.

That's not what "searching" means.

Here, let me help:

merriam-webster.com/dictionary…

Definition of

Definition of '' by Merriam-Webster

^{Merriam-Webster Dictionary}