this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
34 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37717 readers
413 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“This is the most extreme type of monitoring that I’ve seen,” says Pilar Weiss, founder of the National Bail Fund Network, a network of over 90 community bail and bond funds across the United States. “It’s part of a disturbing trend where deep surveillance and social control applications are used pretrial with little oversight.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Except for the "instantaneous" and "Lightspeed" observations, which I think are the real key here. Also, commiting a book crime would require conscious cooperation and coordination with another person/people (the publisher), whereas internet crimes can be done completely solo.

I think a more sensible comparison could be made between computers and telephones or telegraphs

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It’s more efficient, certainly. But telling someone pretrial in 2023 they can’t use a computer isn’t realistic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

In large part I agree, however, it leaves a problem unsolved.

In the case of cp possession/production, how do you effectively sanitize a person's internet traffic?

I think providing devices that only connect to state DNS servers, and only serve approved content could be one way. But it also raises privacy concerns.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Honestly I would argue it doesn't matter in either case.

If it is about possession, there just isn't enough of a negative effect from allowing someone to look at that stuff for another month or so to justify serious infringement on rights without a conviction. The abuse has happened, and a single individual looking at it some more won't affect things much. And after an actual conviction they'll just be in prison, or after release you would have a justification to monitor at least their own internet traffic.

If it's about production, the internet traffic isn't likely to be the problem. Someone sexually abusing children isn't likely to stop just because they can't put it on the internet anymore. At that point you'd rather need to keep them away from children in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well, I'm happy to say I have no idea how the consumption of cp works, but I imagine it's not ad supported. Perhaps you can find it for free, but if you're paying for it, than stemming the flow of funding for child abuse seems worthwhile. Also, do people really get through trail in ~1 month?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)