@alex Isn't "the service" core just a list of hashes? They could easily flip how "the service" works and open source it, allowing independent implementation for how to query it
We need to build our own Twitter. We need to build our own bank. We need to build our own Internet. And apparently, we need to build our own child protection organization.
@alex daily reminder that the true purpose of these services is to feed more CP to the elites, while providing an easy blackmail or incarceration vector for them to the rest of us. It's never been for the children.
It's preposterous to use "open source" to refer to publishing hashes, as hashes themselves don't qualify for copyright, as they lack the creative aspect, so any such release of the hashes won't even qualify for the osd: https://opensource.org/osd/
Sure a large enough collection of hashes may be creative enough to qualify for copyright as a whole, but extracting the hashes from such collection won't create a derivative work.
I'm more driven to eliminate "open source" the more I see it being used as such a vacuous buzzword.
It's merely the *right thing to do* to publish hashes of known illegal images, so an appropriation response to such images can be taken without having to look at the images, but of course these proprietary software companies will never do the right thing unless they're forced to.
@alex you should write a big article about how the government doesn't want to hand out csam detecting software for free and really blow the lid on this story
Hmm well that makes more sense since they’re funded by the US government. IWF is a charity that’s mostly funded by organisations that use their service. I wonder if their hashes are basically identical.
Not really. You missed a fundamental part of your analogy — an area controlled by the mob is the mob's store. Pay up or your not selling anything in it.
@Humpleupagus@alex In these specific cases you call a shakedown a service. The mob telling you to pay up or you will not be making business is totally different to let's say the ESRB telling you if you don't pay up your are not selling in any store.
I wonder why these organisations are set up this way to begin, given that they’re essentially law enforcement. Maybe it was before the government started straight up running cp sites so they could pretend they don’t store it themselves.
@coolboymew@alex @graf@poa.st @Moon And once more I'm vindicated in my statements that hosting anything #federated or #p2p on the #clearnet as non-corporations is unsafe and made intentionally so too.
(That specific incident feels like old news at this point, but anyway.)
@djsumdog@alex@coldacid If their genuine goal is to stop CSAM, they would release their hash list + fingerprints + detection software as open source software.
The fact that they won't is proof that they are just another weaponized NGO.
Open source would mean they couldn't extract hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars from big tech companies with deep pockets; they would have to rely on donors.
"I spit on you from my tower, for you are down there and I up here! *ptooey!*"
All non-profits have to sustain themselves. Talk to anyone who's worked mid-level at a park or for the city and they'll tell you about all the shady practices they use to pull in more money. NGOs tend to make up new purposes and missions when their original goals being met. I've known of a single org that dissolved once once they met their goal (forcing a swimming pool chemical manufacturer to stop dumping EPA acceptable levels of mercury in the river).
I know some organizations that have a very limited number of people blessed by the justice department to verify and report these images. Microsoft famously had one of these people sue Microsoft for PTSD over having to verify and report flagged material in e-mail:
..but in this case we're just talking about hashes, and I doubt their vetting process would also require specialized clearance from law enforcement (required because possession without it is a strict liability crime).
I can see an organization with a limited budget wanting to hold the reins a little tight, but you're also entirely right in that such tight reins defeats the purpose. These orgs are backed by people who don't want small independent Internet sites. They don't want kiwifarms or Subaru forums. They only want to back things that help the big boys like Reddit.
Honestly, I get the feeling even if you get shared access for smaller independent fedi instances, the risk of using their APIs as far as data collection from individuals (even if you're just sending hashes) is probably far greater than anything you gain in content moderation. But ... who knows :blobcatshrug: