# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 10
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/zdoe7hq
Interesting and tough moral dilemma: is it appropriate for Government to strip privacy away from all citizens in favour for the safety of children online to avoid the production and distribution of CSAM? I ask because there’s a podcast from the Australian Federal Police around CSAM in Australia and there was a statement that effectively the prevention of CSAM needs to take a priority over privacy.
Persoanlly, I of course want CSAM to be reduced to the point of becoming non-existent, however I do hold the right to privacy, whether exercised or not, very high on my priority list these days. It’s a tough dilemma for me, that’s for sure 🤔
@screem Simple answer. No. Having children myself it is **my** responsibility not anyone else's to protect them 🤦♂️
@screem Simple answer. No. Having children myself it is **my** responsibility not anyone else's to protect them 🤦♂️
@prologic that’s a fair point. My thinking is really geared towards children that don’t have parents that care what happens to them, which is also an entirely different root cause. I’m still swayed in the same direction as you though
Also brings up the old point of if they take away our privacy, what else would they be willing to take from us. Seems like a net negative all around to punish the majority over the actions of the minority
@screem It is not a tough dilemma for me. A government has no right to perform mass surveillance on its citizens, treating everyone as if they were criminals. It starts with something we can all agree is reprehensible, and they say it stops there, but history tells us it never just *stops there*.
In addition, computers are really bad at their jobs. How many innocent people will be punished with a false positive? How many mothers will be punished for sending a photo of their newborn to the doctor?
I'm talking about punishment not only in the legal sense, but with the time, money, and worry associated with fighting legal punishment. Do you even trust your legal system enough that it will protect innocent people in these circumstances from having their lives ruined?
There are questions to be raised about the effectiveness of such a policy for its intended purpose but I'm running out of characters.
https://puri.sm/posts/internet-of-snitches/
@mckinley I think that’s a fair assessment. Apart from the very top level, I feel there are a lot of good people with a lot of good intentions. I do agree that it will inevitably cross the line but it’ll be the kind of thing where a lot of politicians probably won’t care because they won’t be alive long enough to see extreme abuse of their policies and laws, which we already see with climate change inaction from the Australian Liberal Party.