alt Hacker NewsThe bill is bad, but this is disingenuously stupid:
> Still frustrating that Politico still implies that the bill has any power to stop CSAM, given that everyone who wants to trade it will obviously just use another layer of encryption.
Obviously, many people will not because many are already caught not using any, and many more are just using simple consumer options that this legislation would eliminate.
We can agree that the legislation is horrible without lying to ourselves and asserting that it would have zero impact
Agree that it would have impact, but not the good kind.
The services that deal with CSAM would be flooded with false positives from the automated scanning. They would, in turn, have to find methods of short-cutting the assessment of these false positives so that they can actually function.
The real CSAM would be drowned out by family snaps of kids in pools, of teenagers sexting each other, etc. The ability of the relevant services to actually detect and catch real abusers would be severely hampered. Actual abuse would be caught less and more kids would be harmed.
Five minutes of thought leads to this obvious conclusion. Which implies that this was never about protecting kids in the first place. It's about controlling what people say, as always.