top | item 47050295

(no title)

dtj1123 | 12 days ago

Right... So how much CSAM is an acceptable amount of CSAM in your opinion then?

discuss

order

LorenPechtel|12 days ago

A couple of things come to mind:

1) Zero is basically never the best error rate, effort isn't infinite and spending too much of it on one defect ends up meaning spending less on other issues.

2) Look at what he's saying. This is a classic pattern for providing a fake proof of evil.

a) Point to evil. For example, CSAM

b) Expand the definition of that evil in ways that are often not even evil. Here, include scantily clad in your definition of "sexual". Note that swimsuits qualify.

c) Point to examples of evil in your expanded pool.

d) Claim this points to evidence of the original definition. Note that nothing about their claims precludes their "CSAM" being nothing more than ordinary beach or pool scenes. Their claim includes the null and when the null is a possible answer it should be assumed.

LocalH|12 days ago

To your point 2b, I would posit that it is also evil to sexualize adults against their consent

dtj1123|11 days ago

I've asked how much lower the error rate should be in order to be acceptable, and you've then replied with a rebuttal to the message of the posted article.

I agree that a zero error rate is generally not possible, although I think a company like Xitter can manage better than 101 in 20k.

zb3|12 days ago

Who was abused here?

riotnrrd|12 days ago

When you post on a public forum defending child pornography, it's maybe a good time to take a step back and evaluate your life.

chrystalkey|12 days ago

The people used as template faces and bodies

kakali|12 days ago

The future victims when the imagery stops being enough.