Not to be insensitive to a sensitive topic, but isn't Meta the 'single largest market for <almost anything>'?
(It is also interesting to me that in ~2010, such discussions used to use terrorism, and now it’s CSAM/pedophilia.)
Nah, CSAM/pedophilia argument goes way back. It is just that the terrorism argument has largely disappeared because the emotional impact of mostly 9/11 has been dealt with (terrorism was much more rampant in parts of the previous century, can't recall the decade but if I had to say it was 70s or 80s).
The thing is, tools can be used for Good and Bad. A knife, a car, the Internet, social media.
The problem is if we live in a society where your online identity is pseudonymous at best (remember Rotterdam hospital shooting recently, the shooter got found on 4chan), and there is post-moderation instead of pre-moderation you are going to have garbage content.
A lawsuit like this is used to prove negligence in proportion to the amount of users vs content. Ie. it will result in more active moderation by Meta. In that regard, it is The Netherlands hosting providers who were terrible with removing CSAM. And, almost all of them have improved.
Does that mean the content is removed from the Internet? No, impossible. But it sure as hell got more difficult for the perpetrators to distribute the content. Which is a decent compromise.
Eventually, if you keep threatening people with an outcome that they can easily detect, they'll notice that it's not happening. It's better to threaten them with something invisible.
All this can be true and it is still a bad idea to unilaterally break encryption, just as it was a bad idea to allow unilateral use of wiretap.
If we stick the debate around the truthiness of the allegations, it only takes a few bad examples to lose that argument.
> If we stick the debate around the truthiness of the allegations, it only takes a few bad examples to lose that argument.
That is true, but the argument here is over why people stopped appealing to terrorism to support their policy preferences.
So, I'm just saying we can oppose the policy preference regardless of why they stopped appealing to a problem, and regardless of that problem's "realness"
The allegation here, as seen in the headline, isn't that there's enough pedophile activity on Facebook to rise to the level of being a problem somewhere.
It's just that there's more on Facebook than there is in most other places.
That's all I'm saying. Somehow was that lost? I think we may be having what a former mentor called a "Conflicting agreement" or "Violent agreement" :D
But I think that the point I made is important, different from your point, and topical in the place where I posted it.
No, it isn't. Far from it.
Edit: Unless those angled brackets have a meaning that I am not aware of.
To jansan: The angled brackets is what I've used for a long time to represent a variable or as-yet-unknown value, ie. <Fill in the Blank>
The end goal is to morally and legally blackmail every company to act as an active spy for the panopticon.
> And no, the end goal is to not allow companies to profit from human misery
So says you. But the end result will be a panopticon. Good thing government and corporate oppression are solved issues, so there's no need for impractical things like privacy or freedom anymore.
> Do they take a cut from sex-abuse sales, deliberately turn a blind eye to it
that's exactly it.
Amazon is the biggest market for buying stuff
Tiktok is the biggest market for pedophiles/disinformation
Instagram is the biggest market for self absorbed people
Twitter is the second biggest market for disinformation and terrorism
etc
The HN bubble has moved on for sure, but going by DAU/MAU (which isn’t perfect but is better than “I think”), facebook is still the biggest and is still growing
I have no idea which darknet market holds that crown today, but I'm willing to wager it isn't Zuckerland.
The largest single market is probably Telegram. I bought some cannabis live resin on Telegram just this week. Next day delivery!
IMO no dark net market will ever be bigger than an app you can download on iOS and Android
I heavily doubt that and think you heavily underestimate DN markets by service and volume. We live in crazy times, that's sure.
The number of times I've tried to get friends to make orders on DNMs over the years with no success. If I'd just passed them a Telegram username and told them to download the app they'd have done it there and then.
I ask because… if this is something a lot of people do, then it must either be really simple or there are howtos on youtube/quora/… and I can't find any howto.
It's not complicated at all
You wrote that GP "heavily underestimate DN markets by service and volume". If those markets can't be found using mass-market search engines and don't accept payment using mass-market payment services, then I think they're either nïche or you need to explain how they reached large volume.
A crypto wallet, that connects to one of those multi Billion Dollar networks, very well could be viewed as 'mass market payment service'. I at least know more people using crypto than PayPal, most no 'hackers'.
Rhetorically speaking it's simple to make the biggest in some class seem to be worst in some related class. If I'm the biggest taxi operator in town, I'm likely to have the highest CO₂ emissions of all the taxi companies, see? You can omit or deemphasise the connection between the two and make me seem bad.
It's just a form of lying by omission.
Doesn't sound like a fact.
On FB it's easier to find them compared to Telegram for instance
Wow, what a fact.
I can continue like that for a long time, you know.
Facts don't mean anything without perspective.
2. Even if it were true, it's irrelevant.
Because Meta is supposed to have automated systems that try to prevent this.
Which means they're not working, or Meta doesn't care, or both.