Summary:
The proposed EU regulation aims to address the distribution of explicit content involving children and the online grooming of minors. While the intention to combat child sexual abuse is commendable, Carmela Troncoso and Bart Preneel argue that the regulation sets a dangerous precedent for internet filtering, jeopardizing individuals’ right to privacy in the digital realm.
As scientists, they express serious concerns about the proposal. The underlying technologies required for detecting such content are not yet mature and are invasive. They foresee significant issues with false positives, potentially subjecting innocent citizens to unwarranted investigations. Moreover, the reliance on machine learning algorithms for content detection is problematic, as AI is far from perfect and may misinterpret social contexts.
Additionally, there are worries about function creep, where the same infrastructure could be expanded to monitor other types of content and enable surveillance by less democratic governments. The lack of transparency in the proposed technologies raises concerns about abuse and potential security vulnerabilities.
Rather than implementing such a regulation, the authors suggest focusing on alternative approaches that protect children without compromising privacy. They advocate for user-friendly complaint mechanisms to identify abusive material. The proposed regulation, in its current form, risks undermining encryption and infringing on everyone’s right to a private digital life.
What i would do/propose instead with an alternative approaches to combatting child sexual abuse online while preserving privacy:
1. Establish dedicated teams: creatte specialized teams within law enforcement agencies or other relevant organizations to focus on actively investigating and tracking down individuals involved in the distribution of explicit content involving children and online grooming. These teams can utilize various techniques, including phishing and other methods, to gather intelligence and gather evidence.
2. Prevention through education: add comprehensive education programs that raise awareness about the risks of child sexual abuse online and provide training on how to recognize and report abusive behavior. These programs can be integrated into school curricula, community outreach initiatives, and online safety campaigns.
3. Collaboration with tech companies: develop partnerships between law enforcement and technology companies to develop innovative solutions for detecting and reporting abusive content without compromising user privacy. This could involve implementing AI-powered tools that flag potentially harmful material while preserving the anonymity of users.
4. Enhanced reporting mechanisms: set up an reporting mechanisms to make it easier for individuals to report abusive content or suspicious activities. Provide clear channels and user-friendly platforms where users can report incidents anonymously and receive appropriate support and guidance.
5. Support for victims: dedicate resources and support services for victims of online child sexual abuse, including counseling, legal assistance, and rehabilitation programs. Ensuring that victims receive the necessary help and support is crucial for their recovery and for preventing further exploitation.
If any automatic search are used, I would like first to see the way, how a positive detection will be evaluated. Few times I sent to my mother photo of my 1-3year child playing. And FB flagged it as child porn and ban me for a month. How will the law protect me, if I am innocent but before prove, I would be flagged by media as pedo due to automated detection?
Everyone in his right mind already knows that this is just a pretext to open new windows for privacy peeping.
5 comments
dear EU
please stop trying to become the PRC. Thank you
sincerely, me
Summary:
The proposed EU regulation aims to address the distribution of explicit content involving children and the online grooming of minors. While the intention to combat child sexual abuse is commendable, Carmela Troncoso and Bart Preneel argue that the regulation sets a dangerous precedent for internet filtering, jeopardizing individuals’ right to privacy in the digital realm.
As scientists, they express serious concerns about the proposal. The underlying technologies required for detecting such content are not yet mature and are invasive. They foresee significant issues with false positives, potentially subjecting innocent citizens to unwarranted investigations. Moreover, the reliance on machine learning algorithms for content detection is problematic, as AI is far from perfect and may misinterpret social contexts.
Additionally, there are worries about function creep, where the same infrastructure could be expanded to monitor other types of content and enable surveillance by less democratic governments. The lack of transparency in the proposed technologies raises concerns about abuse and potential security vulnerabilities.
Rather than implementing such a regulation, the authors suggest focusing on alternative approaches that protect children without compromising privacy. They advocate for user-friendly complaint mechanisms to identify abusive material. The proposed regulation, in its current form, risks undermining encryption and infringing on everyone’s right to a private digital life.
What i would do/propose instead with an alternative approaches to combatting child sexual abuse online while preserving privacy:
1. Establish dedicated teams: creatte specialized teams within law enforcement agencies or other relevant organizations to focus on actively investigating and tracking down individuals involved in the distribution of explicit content involving children and online grooming. These teams can utilize various techniques, including phishing and other methods, to gather intelligence and gather evidence.
2. Prevention through education: add comprehensive education programs that raise awareness about the risks of child sexual abuse online and provide training on how to recognize and report abusive behavior. These programs can be integrated into school curricula, community outreach initiatives, and online safety campaigns.
3. Collaboration with tech companies: develop partnerships between law enforcement and technology companies to develop innovative solutions for detecting and reporting abusive content without compromising user privacy. This could involve implementing AI-powered tools that flag potentially harmful material while preserving the anonymity of users.
4. Enhanced reporting mechanisms: set up an reporting mechanisms to make it easier for individuals to report abusive content or suspicious activities. Provide clear channels and user-friendly platforms where users can report incidents anonymously and receive appropriate support and guidance.
5. Support for victims: dedicate resources and support services for victims of online child sexual abuse, including counseling, legal assistance, and rehabilitation programs. Ensuring that victims receive the necessary help and support is crucial for their recovery and for preventing further exploitation.
If any automatic search are used, I would like first to see the way, how a positive detection will be evaluated. Few times I sent to my mother photo of my 1-3year child playing. And FB flagged it as child porn and ban me for a month. How will the law protect me, if I am innocent but before prove, I would be flagged by media as pedo due to automated detection?
Everyone in his right mind already knows that this is just a pretext to open new windows for privacy peeping.