Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by silentmars 3439 days ago
What? How do you suppose this surveillance will be conducted?

It sounds to me like you are proposing that we solve the problem of individual companies having to hire some people to look at bad things by having the government hire a whole bunch of people to look at bad things.
1 comments
ZenoArrow 3439 days ago
>"It sounds to me like you are proposing that we solve the problem of individual companies having to hire some people to look at bad things by having the government hire a whole bunch of people to look at bad things."

No, you've misunderstood.

I'm suggesting that in order to cut down on the depraved content being produced, you have to go after the producers. Increased online surveillance makes it easier for law enforcement to track down the producers (and consumers) of this content, as well as providing stronger evidence for their conviction.

In other words, rather than dealing with the problem on the surface, which is what the content moderators working for online companies are having to do, go after the problems at the source. Cut down on the levels of dodgy content being produced.

Do you understand what I mean now?

link
forgottenpass 3439 days ago
Your argument rests on the assumption of a sufficiently large overlap in the set of illegal and set of disturbing things they viewed.

While the best headline grabbing portion of such content moderation (child abuse) do fall into that intersection, it's a faulty assumption to construct your already-dubious reasoning that better surveillance will improve the live of the content moderators.

link
ZenoArrow 3438 days ago
>"Your argument rests on the assumption of a sufficiently large overlap in the set of illegal and set of disturbing things they viewed."

There's no need for overlap. You see video footage of rape, child abuse, animal abuse, beheadings, etc... that's enough to take someone to trial. One video is enough.

>"While the best headline grabbing portion of such content moderation (child abuse) do fall into that intersection, it's a faulty assumption to construct your already-dubious reasoning that better surveillance will improve the live of the content moderators."

It's not rocket science, it's quite simple. If you stop the ability of the producers of morally bankrupt content to produce the content, there will be less new content to remove. If you disagree, explain your logic.

link