this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
803 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

58137 readers
4194 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

it seems ridiculous to prosecute the particular crime of posession

what does this even mean? you mean with people hoarding CSAM shouldn't be charged because they're not distributing it?

Do people think there would be some dramatic explosion of CSAM?

Yes, this is not your local backwater town where you know there are a few visibly shitty & disgusting people and people tell their kids to stay away and everyone becomes safe. And if you think shit doesn't explode on the internet, you might be living under a rock last 2 decades.

That's stupid on a whole new level and your made up scenario doesn't make it any better. No one is threatened for having been sent some questionable content. The person who sent those however might be and the tech today makes it incredibly easy to prove where anything came from since everyone is being tracked.

Seize all funds received for distributing it, throw anyone involved in producing it in prison and throw away the key,

How about we prevent such things from happening by discouraging it in the firat place? Sure, they won't be down to 0, but your solution starting after the distribution has already started is highly disturbing.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think the problem that poster was trying to illustrate is that it is unpractical to shut down a site or force a site to spend a significant overhead just cause a user could post a certain sequence of bytes to the site. An analogy to the real world would be some guy paints some graffiti on the pavement and the response, every time, being the complete shutdown of the entire city for a month or complete surveillance on every cm^2^ of pavement plus cleaning crews standing by every 10m.

Poster does not want his favourite site going down cause of some bad actor.

[–] uis -3 points 1 year ago

what does this even mean? you mean with people hoarding CSAM shouldn't be charged because they're not distributing it?

This means that current prosecution violates principles of criminal prosecution: namely requirement of intent.