Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lostmsu 56 days ago
What your opponent is saying is, "there are mutually exclusive A and B". A being widespread CSAM and B being somebody need to look at CSAM to remove it.

Can you elaborate on what exactly is wrong there? Do you see the third alternative C and it's not the "whole choice"? Or are you saying A or B do not exist and therefore there's no choice? Please name C, or tell us why A or B don't exist (or aren't acceptable), or explain your view that doesn't fit into these options.
1 comments
ImPostingOnHN 56 days ago
Some people are not okay with actively facilitating harm to people, even if inaction results in harm to other people. See: the trolley problem. This is totally okay, but the point made above is that

>That's a tradeoff you can choose to make

is not correct: It is a tradeoff that one specific person can choose to make, but not one that I or we can choose to make, because we don't control facebook. Mark Zuckerberg controls facebook. He alone can choose to make that tradeoff, or not, on behalf of society.

link
lostmsu 55 days ago
He can't do it alone because Facebook is under US jurisdiction.
link
ImPostingOnHN 55 days ago
Yes, facebook is under US jurisdiction.

Yes, he alone can make the choice. Not you or I.

link