It's a tool that could be abused, but I wouldn't say that it is enough to kill a democracy all by itself.
It's a tool that could be abused, but I wouldn't say that it is enough to kill a democracy all by itself.
Chat control takes away one liberty from democracy.
Ask any half decent go player what will happen to that stone if we just ignore the attack upon it?
You don't have the liberty to avoid that, today. By design.
My point being that if one could prove that the ChatControl detection is only running locally and that it is only reporting what's acceptable to report, then it wouldn't hurt your freedom (except for your freedom to do illegal stuff, but that's the whole point).
The problem is that it is not possible to prove this. Fundamentally. We need to talk about that. Not throw some "it will kill democracy because you should trust me when I say it".
That key will leak eventually, it's too juicy a target.
You describe chat control as if it's just an AI csam scanner that runs locally on your phone, like what apple did recently-ish.
Chat control is so much more than that, and so much worse
That's not my understanding. My understanding is that ChatControl will run client-side scanning and report what is deemed illegal.
This is not a master key to all communications.
On the contrary, it is an argument in favour of extending ChatControl to using machine learning for detecting such cases.
The problem, again, is that we don't want to have an opaque system that can be extended to surveilling new things, because it's very difficult to audit and make sure it is not abused.