• Libb ( Libb@piefed.social ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    In French, we have this saying: 'qui veux tuer son chien l’accuse d’avoir la rage." which could very roughly read as ‘when one wishes to kill their dog, they say it’s rabid.’

  • Here we go again. The second anyone mentions pedos it’s going to be used as an argument against civil rights, unless it’s about the Epstein files in which case it gets buried.

    It’s so blatant.

  • smegger ( smegger@aussie.zone ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Seems like the easiest argument for any group wanting to destroy privacy. But destroy one method and they move to the next. Gotta get the offenders, not just nuke privacy for all just on the off chance you slow the perverts down a little bit.

  • Yet the clear web’s main browser helps legitimate pedophile networks like Meta, YouTube, Discord, and Roblox flourish.

    I’m sure Lloyd Richardson has these child accessible websites banned in Canada… /s
    Dan Sexton lives in nonce central, his digressive victimhood can be read instantly.
    Gretchen Peters works for nonces in the House; something something Epstein’s list.

  • Hirom ( Hirom@beehaw.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Could there be collaborative moderation where node admins volontarily block other nodes or onion services that host CSAM?

    I wonder if that’s technically possible for a hidden service directory or rendez-vous point to do that. It wouldn’t completely kill those services, but may at least make less Tor resources available to them.

    The trickiest question may not be technical but organisational. The Tor project probably doesn’t want to be in a position to validate/decide block requests. Different entities all over the world would ask for blocks, for many different kind of contents.

    • In the network formerly known as freenet, forgetting the current name, traffic to and from the node, and the data at rest is all encrypted, only referenced by keys so nobody has a real influence on what they store or transmit. Plus, they only know the peer that made a request, not a source or a destination, so just ‘pass this key back to me if you have it, otherwise ask the next person’, so routing is just as opaque.

      In cases like that there’s not much to be done, as it well should be because as soon as control can be performed it’ll be demanded or liability placed on those who don’t comply.