> Yes, policies can be based on fears and opinion, but some numbers and rationality usually help make better decisions.

Sure, but you aren’t the decision maker. This is a political decision, and so will be based on the balance of fears and forces at play, not a rational analysis.

It doesn’t matter how right or rational you are. It only matters how many people think you understand what they care about.

If the Hacker position is ‘people shouldn’t care about child pornography because the solutions are all to invasive’ so be it. I just don’t think that’s an effective position.

>you aren’t the decision maker.

That is only partially true. If we both write, other people may read, then you and me possibly influence people. Wa are social beings, we are influenced by people around us. So we're both a tiny part of the decision process. And you talk about political decision: politicians keep listening to people through polls, phone calls received, and other ways. Even dictators can be, when numbers are high enough.

So it does matter how rational we are. Over time and on average, people are more often convinced by rational discourse than irrationality. Probably because rationality has a higher likelihood of being right. But yes, we'll go through periods where irrationality wins... Still, it's very hard to be on the opposite side of logic and facts for a long time.

>If the Hacker position is "people shouldn’t care about child pornography"

I have not read that here. If you believe that child pornography is a massive issue, I respect that. I just would have hoped you could better describe the actual size of the problem and its evolution. You could have influenced me more effectively.

> If you believe that child pornography is a massive issue, I respect that. I just would have hoped you could better describe the actual size of the problem and its evolution.

I don’t mind whether you are convinced. I’m not trying to convince you about the size of the problem.

My position isn’t about how large the threat is. I don’t have any information that you don’t have access to. My position is that if we care about privacy we have to accept that people other than ourselves think the problem is big enough to warrant these measures.

You have already lost this battle because enough people are convinced about the problem that tech companies are already doing what you don’t want them to do.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/child-predators

>if we care about privacy we have to accept that people other than ourselves think the problem is big enough to warrant these measures.

Not sure what you mean here by "accept". Accept the fact those people and opinions exist? Sure! Accept their opinion without challenging, without asking questions? No. Accept this opinion is big and rational enough for the majority to follow and make laws? No.

>You have already lost this battle

What makes you think that? That's just your opinion. You know, even when battles are lost, wars can be won later won. "Right to Repair", "Net neutrality", "Global Warming", and here: "open source hardware". All those battles have been fluid. Telling people it is over, it is too late, is a very common trick to try to influence/convince people to accept the current state. That certainly does not make it true.

I understand you may try to convince readers that it is over, because it may be your opinion. If that's the case, just be frank about it, and speak proudly for yourself of what you wish. Don't hide behind "politicians", "tech companies" and "other people".

> What makes you think that? That's just your opinion.

It’s not just my opinion that Apple has implemented a hash based mechanism to scan for child pornography that runs on people’s phones. People complaining about it have definitely lost the battle already. It is already here.

> I understand you may try to convince readers that it is over, because it may be your opinion.

That is not an accurate understanding of my argument.

My position is to agree with those who see this as a slippery slope of increasingly invasive surveillance technology, and to point out that simply arguing against it has been consistently failing over time.

I am also pointing out that one reason it’s failing is that even if the measures are invasive and we think that is bad, the problems they are intended to solve are real and widely perceived as justifying the measures.

What I advocate is that we accept that this is the environment, and if we don’t like Apple’s solution, we develop, or at least propose alternative ways of addressing the problem.

That way we would have a better alternative to argue in favor of rather than just complaining about the solution which Apple has produced and which is the only proposal on the table.

Are you falling into their trap knowingly or not?

There is a child molestation problem everywhere in the world, including online. I have seen nothing explaining it is getting bigger / worse. I have read that most of the cases are family members, in the real world.

So when I hear Apple and Government explain "because of the children" they want to monitor our phones more, in the context of growing assumed dictatorships, Pegasus, Snowden reveleation, do you really think that solving the child pornography issue will help refrain them, or slow them down? Open source hardware, political pressure, consumer pressure, and regulation, possibly monopoly break-ups. In the US, it starts with the people.

But doing better with child pornography won't change anything there, it juts moves the discussion to some other topic. Distraction. That is my point all along. There is no data that shows that all of a sudden child pronography has progressed leaps and bounds. So people suddenly concerned by that are most likely not truthful,a dn they have a very strong agenda. That's what we need to focus on, not their "look at the children" distraction.

> Are you falling into their trap knowingly or not?

This is a false dichotomy and a false assumption.

> There is a child molestation problem everywhere in the world, including online.

Agreed.

> I have seen nothing explaining it is getting bigger / worse. I have read that most of the cases are family members, in the real world.

Have you listened to Sam Harris, or heard the FBI? They have a very different view.

It could be that both are true: there is a child porn problem and governments are using it as an excuse.

The only thing you seem to be going on is a story you once heard, that may have been true at the time, but may not be now.

> So when I hear Apple and Government explain "because of the children" they want to monitor our phones more, in the context of growing assumed dictatorships, Pegasus, Snowden reveleation, do you really think that solving the child pornography issue will help refrain them, or slow them down?

That would misleading sense given that you are assuming child porn is not a growing problem.

Porn in general is growing hugely why wouldn’t child porn also be growing?

Generally Apple has resisted overreach, but I agree that they are slowly moving in the wrong direction.

Apple is not the government.

> Open source hardware,

> political pressure, consumer pressure, and regulation, possibly monopoly break-ups. In the US, it starts with the people.

You contradict yourself here. You seem to think the government can’t be slowed and yet political pressure will work. Which is it?

> But doing better with child pornography won't change anything there,

I agree - it won’t eliminate the forces that want to weaken encryption etc.

But a more privacy respecting solution would still help.

> it juts moves the discussion to some other topic. Distraction. That is my point all along.

> There is no data that shows that all of a sudden child pronography has progressed leaps and bounds. So people suddenly concerned by that are

Isn’t there? The FBI claims it is growing.

> most likely not truthful,

Ok, we know you don’t trust the FBI.

But enough people do that we can’t ignore them. Even if the problem isn’t growing as Sam Harris claims it is, trying to persuade people that the problem doesn’t need to be solved seems like a good way to undermine the causes you support.

> a dn they have a very strong agenda. That's what we need to focus on, not their "look at the children"

As I say, I agree there are people trying to exploit ‘look at the children’ in support of their own agenda.

I just don’t think that means there isn’t a real problem with child porn. Denying that there is a problem seems equally agenda driven.