Olives @olives@social.cleverlibre.org

Ms. Kidron is an annoying anti-porn person in the U.K.

She was given a "barony" by the Tory Party around a decade ago, because she created a documentary where she... Complained about there being porn on the Internet.

She used to work with Harvey Weinstein in Hollywood.

Another Hollywood Actor.

Hint: If there is a reputable and safe site which does the same thing, and is better moderated, someone is unlikely to go to the sketchy site (which is the only thing that would be left after The Man gets his big hammer).

Duh.

https://qoto.org/web/statuses/110616056242888138
As it turns out, Olives has covered sexy AI shenanigans before.

Olives thinks prohibitions should be narrowly targeted at content containing actual minors (not simply "disturbing" content). Actual as in a real living person.

Anything to the contrary is, frankly, quite illiberal.

Olives also doesn't believe that people are generally cartoon characters who victimize others for the sake of being evil.

Olives also thinks the #OnlineSafetyBill is terribly opportunistic, and quite unhelpful.

The IWF is a whole other can of worms.

They are primarily funded by the U.K. Government. In other words, it could be considered an appendage of the Tory Party.

The IWF blocked Wikipedia for a bit a decade ago, because a very obscure page contained an old German band cover.

They also had a strange arrangement where they didn't quite operate legally, and relied on the police agreeing not to arrest them.

They also have a weird program where someone can submit their nudes to them for them to take down.

Like cops, they don't have a particular expertise in the human mind, and their opinions are not particularly useful.

Looking at the Australian guy's circle, I saw a fairly silly take.

Such as a computer generated image being "exactly the same" as someone being abused. No, it's not, that is absurd and ridiculous.

Real lack of maturity.

https://reclaimthenet.org/brazils-federal-public-ministry-pushed-for-social-media-platforms-to-disclose-id-of-all-bolsonaro-followers Isn't that a bit of an over-reach?

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/eff-supports-press-act-protect-journalists A bill to protect press freedom by allowing journalists to protect the identities of their sources from the State.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/you-can-help-stop-these-bad-internet-bills Help stop these terribly authoritarian bills in the U.S.

https://reclaimthenet.org/new-home-video-doorbell-has-social-media-powered-facial-recognition Home bell tapping into social media sparks privacy concerns.

https://reclaimthenet.org/internet-archive-uses-dmca-takedown-on-drm-removal-tool Big Books is putting pressure on the Internet Archive.

While we could do with going back to the days of rugged action men in films (or in some content), I'd prefer it if the action man wasn't based on a real grifter who grifts off trafficking conspiracies.

Well, like, sometimes people are in the mood for particular things, right? So, impulsive like that.

https://reclaimthenet.org/brazils-cbdc-allows-government-to-freeze-funds Concerns over CBDCs in Brazil.

Hearing more things about cannabis and it's surprising how something with so many medicinal properties could be set off limits because of the drug war.

https://reason.com/2023/07/18/brickbat-too-rough/ Ugh.

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/07/17/if-the-crime-rate-goes-down-after-half-a-cop-shop-quits-what-are-we-even-paying-for/ Huh, interesting.

https://edri.org/our-work/eu-parliament-directive-combatting-gender-based-violence-step-in-the-right-direction-misses-on-protecting-privacy/
Hmm... There's a censorship smell to this, and EDRi is not exactly known for calling out threats to free expression consistently.

That worries me.

The Australian guy has pivoted to pointing to a flawed survey (reviewed by content mods) from two years ago to justify a Chat Stasi (honestly an improvement in rhetoric).

It looked at a small sub-sample of people "looking for help" and asked them whether they spoke to minors after viewing actual child porn (or "violent content", ugh).

He attempted to directly conflate "talking to a minor" with "abusing a minor".

He also failed to account for other possible factors, such as impulsivity increasing the probability in engaging in both activities, and / or limited opportunities to engage in this activity.

Another possible theory, and one inspired by Dr. Seto, is that negative mental health states, such as depressive or anxious states are linked to *both activities*. Perhaps, partially as some kind of coping mechanism.

This isn't to argue that simply being depressed, anxious, or impulsive will make someone do it. Also, whether someone is depressed or not, I have no less disdain for any person who abuses someone.

All things considered though, he doesn't think very hard before quickly coming to a conclusion. Also, what is "violent content"?

This was also conducted by a group which was only founded a year prior and by individuals who don't appear to have a long background. They, along with him, appear aggressive in lobbying for a Chat Stasi (while I'm not against fighting real child porn, I kind of like privacy...)

A cursory review of their website shows them misrepresenting the efficacy of a prevention program which only surveyed individuals who got to the end (vanishingly few).

https://qoto.org/@olives/110462274531891870
https://qoto.org/@olives/110445384736437393
While the content is problematic (well, not "violent content"), it's not problematic in the way he suggests it to be.

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/07/17/new-jersey-supreme-court-if-cops-are-going-to-digitally-wiretap-a-facebook-account-they-need-a-wiretap-order/ Looks like a wiretap to me.

New Jersey's Supreme Court rules that the government can't take a request to wiretap someone, and pretend it isn't a request to wiretap someone (with a higher standard to meet), but a regular search.