I am with the UK government on this. They have asked social media companies to stop child abuse images/videos from appearing on their platforms and they have not done so to a level that appeases the UK government. All of them have dragged their feet year after year not coming up with viable solutions to stop child abuse images/video from appearing on their platforms. It was a number of years ago I think that the UK government told the companies to get their act together or the government will be forced to step in and do it for them. The images and videos continued to be posted on their platforms so the UK government decided to act. People all over the world complain about schools not taking action against bullies or assaults' against children or teachers. People complain about local councils not taking action against rogue builders or landlords and what is the one things that is common to each? those affected say 'deal with the problem otherwise I will be forced to take action myself'. If the ordinary man and woman on the street do it, why can't the UK government? The social media companies were warned. They had a number of years to come up with viable and credible solutions to stop abuse images and videos from appearing on their platforms. They didn't take the threat seriously therefore they did virtually nothing and now they complain when a government steps in to do something the companies were asked to do themselves. Therefore what did the social media companies expect was going to happen? that the UK government was going to allow these social media platforms to continue to host child abuse images and videos? not likely. You reap what you sow.
That is really sad and demonstrates you really don't know either the implications of client side surveillance, nor the fact it would mean the child abusers would be even harder to catch, as if you think they will not know how to circumvent CSAM then you are wrong.
By all means iCloud and servers could be scanned for CSAM, but NOT client side scanning which steps over a red line, which is understood by so many experts and for good reason.
It was never about CSAM, flawed as it can be, it was about client side scanning opening a Pandora's box of dangers, and where people who have bought equipment, pay for the energy used on that equipment, and the processing speeds expected should not then be treated as guilty until proven innocent, which goes against every idea of justice let alone the can of worms it opens for a total surveillance society.
Anyone who has ever been involved in cracking down on these paedophiles will if answering honestly tell you they are always one step ahead, and putting client side scanning at the outset CSAM would just make it so much harder to track these people down.
People are really getting caught up in the merits or otherwise of CSAM, when in fact it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with CLIENT SIDE SCANNING.
Imagine how we are all bombarded with potential fraudsters now and how governments and institutions tell us how we need to make passwords and bank details secure....IMPOSSIBLE WITH CLIENT SIDE SCANNING giving the potential of NOTHING BEING PRIVATE.
Sadly it is thought that 2-3% of adult men are involved in paedophilia, with 50.42% of the population being Male of which 16.4% are under 18, and if we suggest that these are not involved, its 34.02% bringing down that figure to around 1-1.5% (still too high but those figures are at present only presumed).
The world population is approximately 8,200,000,000 people yet ironically there are thought to be around 10,000,000,000 devices such as smart phones etc.
Overall then these miscreants represent an absolutely tiny overall figure of around 1-1.5% and I would remind you of how we perceive justice should be, i.e. it is not and never should be the innocent having to prove they are innocent, they should always be presumed to be innocent and client side scanning presumes guilt of a massive majority of the populating rendering on line safety and even off line safety including banking or anything involving data that needs to be secure....IMPOSSIBLE with client side scanning.
The doctrine civilised society incorporates dates to 1769, "the law holds that it is better that 10 guilty people escape, than 1 innocent suffer" = THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
Client side scanning turns that on its side, using child abuse and paedophilia as a convenient excuse, which is wrong on so many counts.
We often hear about 'freedom of speech' etc., but with client side scanning even private thoughts committed to YOUR personal property are no longer free from surveillance, private details on every aspect of your life or others, and it could actually bring the internet to a complete halt as far as technological change, because it would mean we were going backwards.
People assume wrongly in my opinion that governments, bad players etc., will only be interested in client side scanning via CSAM with regard the morally abhorrent child molesters....History demonstrates what might start as a moral crusade is usurped by those who can, including governments and criminal fraternity.
