It appears that Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 7/31/23 13:00, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > >> No, they aren't. Cryptography is binary but stopping pedophiles is not. > >There's a *lot* of fuzz around what CSAM is. One of the many problems >with detecting CSAM is that it requires knowledge of things that aren't >present in the image, like the precise date at which the image was taken >and the birthday(s) of the subject(s) involved. ... While that is technically true, it is a red herring. People I know who deal with CSAM tell me that the stuff they are concerned with is small children having horrible things done do them. I realize there are opportunistic politicians freaking out about teens who send each other nude selfies but (disregarding the somewhat separate issue of revenge porn) that's not the problem. >Everyone needs to understand that a likely effect of any CSAM >countermeasure is to increase the distribution and production of CSAM, >and with it the number of victims. Um, what? R's, John
