siiky
2025/08/18
2025/08/18
en
A post for exactly the wrong people -- those who'll read it are already against Chat Control...
- Social problems seldom have technical solutions
- Laws should be just/fair/applied to everyone
- Trying to make a right with a wrong is very likely counterproductive
- Privacy is the autonomy of choosing what to share with whom
- Security helps keep (though does not guarantee) privacy
- Individual online privacy is still possible
- Companies employing unethical practices (including breaking individual privacy on a massive scale) for competitive/monetary/etc advantages DOES NOT justify making it explicitly legal to break individual privacy on a massive scale
- Criticizing and/or opposing a proposed "solution" does not require one to have/propose a solution
- The ends do not always justify the means
- A "solution" that creates more problems than it solves is not a solution: e.g., inducing diabetes is not a good "solution" to someone with cancer, even though some types of diabetes are livable -- they still have cancer
- Politicians, law enforcement, military personnel, etc are possibly criminals as well
(not just bad in isolation, but really bad considering the hypothetical and hoped for gains)
Some reasons why the alleged motivations behind it are dubious at best:
- It is (at least in part) indended to defend children and adolescents, and yet their opinions were not taken into account in preliminary research (examples follow)
Some reasons why it's not a solution:
- It does not technically guarantee criminals will be caught
- (in part) because it does not technically prevent criminals from using secure means of communication
Some reasons why it's not enforceable:
- The "human review layer" is not humanly feasible; even a miniscule percentage of messages entails a huge number of human reviewers
Some of the problems created/aggravated by the proposed law:
- It makes it explicitly legal to break individual privacy on a massive scale (by the EU governments, law enforcement, military personnel, etc)
- It decreases individual security on a massive scale (by everyone, not only the EU governments, law enforcement, military personnel, etc)
- It exempts politicians, law enforcement, military personnel, etc
- It WILL cause innocent individuals to be incriminated and criminalized
- Its enforcement entails a human review layer of flagged content
- It does not guarantee ethical handling of flagged content by this human review layer
- It does not technically prevent authorities from indefinitely storing and maintaining access to already reviewed content (whether legal or illegal)
- It will negatively affect all citizens, the vast majority of which are law-abiding -- EVEN IF criminals DO NOT switch to secure means of communication
- Once criminals switch to secure means of communication, it will only affect law-abiding citizens (negatively), and will not positively affect anyone
- It does not technically prevent human reviewers from leaking review content (whether legal or illegal)