• willis936@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel also really frustrated to know that a pedophile or any criminal is able to escape justice because the encryption is good enough

    How do you know something that’s provably false? Pedophiles who evade justice are not doing careless things that need end to end encryption, like backing up their porn to iCloud. The problem doesn’t start or end with encryption. The policy is entirely about privacy and has nothing to do with protecting children.

    • Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I totally agree about privacy, but I can’t agree when some people are thinking every government is trying to do mass surveillance and has evil thoughts.

      Online criminality is kind of new and internet can’t just be heaven for criminals.

      It’s about finding a right balance between all of these things and remembering that most citizens are honest.

      And, despite the fact that some people here just seem to hate the police no matter what, it’s also important to be able to investigate on the web.

      One day, these people could be the victim of someone and they would be probably really happy if there was a way to catch these criminals.

      That being said I don’t know what the perfect balance is and I’m trying to be open minded about it.

      • imkj@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m actually interested to hear what you think is the right balance. I’m personally of the conviction that the public’s privacy trumps the needs of law enforcement. Where does the balance lie, for you?

        • Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know what the right balance would be.

          I think I’d trust my government and my police (which I work for) enough to have a lot more cameras in the streets. But I wouldn’t want that to happen in a totalitarian country.

          Personally, I wouldn’t want my devices to be scanned by whatever program, but I wouldn’t mind if what was coming in and out of my computer was scanned to prevent organized crime in a certain way.

          But only because to communicate I’m using installations which don’t belong to me, but to the phone company.

          • Balder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think the problem with this is assuming the incentive is to do good for humanity. That’s never the case, or better saying, that’s never what prevails. Possibilities are always gamed to profit or power gain. The same way a medical system is corrupted so that surgeons make unnecessary surgeries to earn more regardless of the risk you take (in a context where medicine is all about human life, hence “good”), I don’t trust any organization scanning everything you do and everything you have for the “good of humanity”.

            Even science institutions have been turned into tools for power, despite modern science starting as a method for curious people to understand the world and sharing their discoveries with other like-minded people.