[bisRepetita]

>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".

[zepto]

> 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.

[bisRepetita]

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.

[zepto]

> 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.