I uh actually agree with you almost entirely. Except at the end I’m like “and that’s why it won’t work as protection”.

Software hasn’t been treated like other fields of engineering and all operators have needed for protection from liability was the twin shields of “nothing I could do” and “I was doing nothing” to come out of any courthouse relatively unscathed.

That type of “aww shucks technocracy” is only possible if you do the bare minimum or nothing at all. Once an operator implements some kind of protection (yes, even one with warning labels all over it), both defenses are rendered unusable.

Now that you’ve done something you’re able to be held liable for the effects of what you’ve done and for knowing there was a problem.

The picture gets even murkier when we look at how things are going! Lawsuits against Tesla for their self driving deaths are making waves not because they impugn the dignity of Americas biggest car manufacturer by market cap but because every judge who sees one raises the biggest eyebrow possible at software engineering not being held to the same standard as any other type, both in a court of law and within its own process.

There’s a good chance that software PEs will become a thing (again?) as a result.

The long and short of it is that because the only reason monsters like moot are able to exist is their sly lethargy and looking at the legal storm rolling into software engineering, having something bolted onto the backend like this would be a bad idea.

I think automated tools like this can be put to use though if they were hosted separately and provided with an api that linked up nicely with some moderation queue standard and returned something like “entries 1,5 and 9 are likely csam” back to the moderator. It would at least save the mod from dealing with the material directly.

So I guess I agree but come to the opposite conclusion.

I think you’re off base here. The utopian socialists were arguing against the methods and outcomes of revolutionary socialism, this person is trying their best to explain that this particular tool has serious legal repercussions within the framework we all live under. Those are pretty different.

The reason I see the logic in their arguments is because there’s longstanding legal precedent for misuse of a tool or material because it’s better than nothing to not be a defense even if there are no other options available.

So if you built a car so big no type of shock absorber could handle it cornering at speed and you knew it, using some amazing whiz bang material for shocks isn’t a defense because even though it’s the best thing you knew it wouldn’t work.

Legally speaking, the right choice there is not to make an excessively dangerous vehicle if you don’t want to be held liable for negligence.

It’s also the argument throughout unsafe at any speed although the courts always seem to side with the automakers 🤔

Or if one were to get sued for hosting csam, using the latest whiz bang ai system for detection wouldn’t be a defense or even a point in your favor because you knew it wasn’t a reasonable use of the underlying technologies. You can’t say “judge, I was relying on the ai csam detector!” When the component parts of the ai csam detector have big “prototype, do not use in production” stickers all over them.

Ultimately while these tools might protect mods and users from having to view csam in the moderation process, that’s just one side of the struggle and on its other side they’re a paper shield at best and proof of negligence at worst.

Lay off. This person is right.

We here at hexbear are concerned about protecting people from seeing csam. That’s good. The rest of lemmy is concerned about that and the very real consequences of csam uploads for the sites, which is getting dropped by hosting and registrar and prosecuted for distributing.

There are already cases where that kind of legal dos attack has worked, there’s even cases of anti csam organizations uploading it to reverse image search sites and then serving them papers when the reverse image search site displays the uploaded image to compare with nonexistent results.

The person you’re replying to isn’t trying to fuck shit up, they’re telling you that this tool won’t actually solve the problem it’s marketed for.

E: edited for clarity and kindness

That person says they were on world and switched to ee. They also say they were driven back to Reddit by hexbear. World preemptively defederated hexbear before any user interactions happened and ee and hexbear were federated for a day before this thread.

So one day of hexbear on ee drove this poster back to Reddit. Or they’re lying about the experience on world.

I want to understand what you meant. Ive refined my question to be as straightforward and clear as possible over our entire conversation.

If you think you’re being trolled then just don’t respond. Look away. Do something else.

If you are willing to have a conversation based on the thread topic:

I’d like to know what you meant by

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts

The context is users blaming the us for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan, and surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.

Was that a wrong assessment? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?

I’m not trolling. I haven’t insulted or accused you of anything and I’ve tried my level best to treat you with the kindness of Christ and patience of Job.

I’d like to know what you meant by

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts

I took a look at the context, which was users blaming the us for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan, and surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.

Was that a wrong assessment? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?

So let me summarize:

You won’t tell me what I’ve lied about. You won’t clarify your position. You won’t confirm or deny what statements of fact you accept. You won’t accept the other posters in this thread as people (???).

You asked why you should engage in this discussion any further. I don’t believe you should. You seem to have nothing to say even when asked clear, direct questions intended to give you a platform to speak. There is no discussion here.

If, on the other hand, you do want to keep going (you do not have to. You can just not respond. No one will judge you.):

Based on your statement

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts

Which was made in the context of other users blaming the United States for production of opium during the occupation of Afghanistan, I surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.

Was I wrong in that? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?

Here I go repeating myself again:

You, in this post:

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.

The thing people are blaming the us for is increased opium production under the occupation of Afghanistan.

So are you suggesting that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts?

So you’re not going to explain how you came to the conclusion that the us occupation government in Afghanistan wasn’t responsible for opium production while it was in power and you’re also not gonna provide any source for the facts that led you to that conclusion?

I bet I could make a ton of money selling maga branded dram measures.

You said there were zero facts to support blaming the us for production during the occupation, so does that mean that the production didn’t happen or it wasn’t the occupation governments fault?

There’s no wrong answer here. I’m not gonna send the stasi to break down your door for being a lib, I just want to understand how someone who clearly values logic and rhetoric came to that conclusion.

Lol believe me, the only thing I’ve gotten or expect to get from this interaction is a headache.

I’m not using any strawmen or rhetorical traps (what even is that?) or twisting your words. If you feel attacked just tap out, there’s nothing to win or lose and a conversation on the internet isn’t worth getting heated over.

What you said and I quoted a couple of times way earlier implies you don’t think the us was responsible for opium production during the occupation and I want to understand your viewpoint. Do you think the us was responsible for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan?

Quick response!

Would you say that the United States is responsible for governing industrial and agricultural output during its occupation?

had someone actually made such a suggestion, that would be interesting. when and where did that happen?

Allow me to repeat myself:

You, in this post:

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.

So, how’d you come to the conclusion that the us isn’t to blame for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan?

Suggesting someone needs to twist themselves up in knots to blame the us for opium production during the occupation implies that the United States isn’t clearly responsible for opium production during the occupation.

Unless theres another reason someone would have to twist themselves up in knots to get there, of course.

That’s a conclusion. Now I’m not trying to get a gotcha or own or something here. I understand that sometimes when you get to talkin about something you might say things you don’t mean to. My question is how’d you get there?

You, in this post:

twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.

So what conclusion do the facts support if not that the us is to blame for opium production during the occupation?

You said American blame for poppy production during the occupation isn’t supported by the facts.

I restated those facts and asked what conclusion they do support.

So did the occupation increase opium production on purpose or just turn a blind eye to it?

Before 9/11 they had banned poppy cultivation. After America leaves, they ban poppy cultivation. During the occupation, lots of poppies are cultivated and processed into opium.

America consumes 80% of the world opium supply on average.

What conclusion do these facts support?

Lol

They’re not my users, they’re our users, comrade.