Olives @olives@qoto.org

Remember when Zoom and Dropbox lied about using E2EE? Something that is nice about it is that it's provably secure.

https://www.wired.com/2011/05/dropbox-ftc/
https://wersm.com/zoom-does-not-actually-support-e2e-encryption-for-video-meetings/

If Facebook was going to exploit Whatsapp or similar to make money btw (other than putting in regular ads, sponsored posts, and business accounts), they probably wouldn't directly break the E2EE, they would mine the metadata, which they're already marketing as a tool for "fighting abuse".

Then, they could sell the idea of protecting the confidentiality of your messages. In a chat called puppies? Alright, so we know you like puppies. Didn't break the E2EE.

https://inews.co.uk/news/nhs-psychiatric-wards-are-video-monitoring-children-and-adults-24-hours-a-day-sparking-privacy-fears-2553448 Cameras installed in rooms of government run mental hospitals sparks privacy concerns.

https://reason.com/2022/04/09/the-new-campaign-for-a-sex-free-internet/ An important article from last year about who the real censors are.

https://reason.com/2023/09/27/a-study-finds-no-evidence-that-decriminalization-boosted-drug-related-deaths-in-oregon/ Commentary from Reason.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395923002025

"Changes in arrests following decriminalization of low-level drug possession in Oregon and Washington"

"We obtained arrest data for 2019 to 2021 for intervention states (Oregon and Washington) and control states (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, and Nevada). We calculated monthly rates for arrests overall and for violent crimes, drug possession, equipment possession, non-drug crimes, and a set of low-level crimes termed displaced arrests."

"There were no significant changes in overall arrests, non-drug arrests or arrests for violent crime in either state, relative to controls."

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2809867

"In this cohort study using synthetic control analysis, laws decriminalizing drug possession in Oregon and Washington were not associated with changes in fatal drug overdose rates in either state."

I've resisted commenting on a few internet control lobbyists. I thought I'd cover this one though:

It was a worry that someone might encounter child porn on the Internet (or something they think is it).

1) It seems to be pretty rare. I suppose if someone spends a lot of time on the Internet, they *might* encounter it, especially over the years. Maybe.

2) I don't understand what the expectation here is supposed to be. It's not realistic for every bad thing on the Internet to never appear...

3) Burning things down simply because something *might* appear doesn't seem very proportionate or rights preserving... It's also unlikely to make a difference, or much of one, but that is secondary to this.

Do you know one of the things which struck me last year in regards to the #chatcontrol?

Someone pointed out they rely on things like E2EE to talk to their psychologist. It was a form of teletherapy. This proposal would be essentially invading the sanctity of that space. That was one of the reasons they opposed it.

It really makes you think. What sorts of cases of therapy might be covered here? Also, could you feel secure knowing your words could be plucked out and twisted against you? Something said in therapy used against you? Or viewed by a third party?

"She unabashedly continues to spread the narrative of supposed "urgency" of indiscriminate chat control that has been scripted by PR agencies."

It does kind of feel like that, doesn't it, Ylva says what the lobbyists say word by word, line by line, even if it is nonsensical.

https://jezebel.com/ashton-kutcher-thorn-sex-workers-1850852760

"Spotlight is regarded as especially dangerous as it uses Amazon’s Rekognition facial recognition technology, even though one test by the ACLU showed Rekognition misidentified 28 members of Congress, who were disproportionately people of color, as having previous arrests, and studies have discredited the accuracy of facial recognition algorithms generally."

"Kutcher claimed in 2017 that Thorn helped identify 6,000 U.S. sex-trafficking victims, including 2,000 children, in a six-month period by using Spotlight. But, as some journalists pointed out at the time, those numbers didn’t seem to square with reality.

From 2009 through 2015, FBI agents working on child sex trafficking cases identified just 175 underage trafficking victims on average per year, per the attorney general’s 2015 annual report to Congress on trafficking reviewed by Reason.

A 2020 version of this report specifies that the U.S. Health and Human Services Department’s Trafficking Victim Assistance Program served 105 underage victims in 2018, 144 in 2019, and 307 in 2020."

https://newrepublic.com/article/175653/anti-trafficking-movement-gave-cover-opportunistic-men Interesting...

There is a lot of chatter against chat control lately. You can help oppose this terrible idea by writing to E.U. MEPs.

You know what, I'll avoid giving them attention for now.