undefined | Better HN

0 pointsxulres2y ago0 comments

Stop with the allegedly it was a anonymous service that was reachable from onion. There is no question at all that there was CSAM shared over it. I don't care about the rest but all this "allegedly" shit in regards of CSAM gets on my nerves. I actually thought people here either work in bigger corps or have experience in running services themselves and would know about the real size of the CSAM problem. But I guess not, ignorance is bliss.

Also it's only their hosted for profit service. Use the fsf instance if you feel violated by a user account. https://jitsi.member.fsf.org/

0 comments

ComputerGuru2y ago

I personally think it was likely/almost certainly the case. That doesn’t change the fact that without sufficient actual evidence it remains “allegedly.”

zozbot2342y ago

Well, the announcement talks about clear-cut ToS violations. Maybe it was about illegally streamed soccer matches - that's a bit of a plague as of late.

Vinnl2y ago

I mean, it could also be beheadings, revenge porn, doxxing, etc. Lots of clear-cut violations that are more serious than illegally streamed soccer matches.

But the true answer is probably "all of the above".

pengaru2y ago

Not all porn is CSAM... Are we just assuming it's CSAM because non-CSAM would be on OnlyFans? Is there not an appeal for the anonymity and zero-cost Jitsi offered vs. OF-like services, for consenting adults?

I've never used OF but assumed they take a cut. Through Jitsi a performer could arrange for payment via crypto, protect their identity, and not pay a cut to any middle-men beyond the crypto fees. What am I missing?

lnxg33k12y ago

Piracy is still the best way/our best chance to get rid of soccer and all the nothingness that it involves in terms of drama, gossip, etc

1 more reply

yieldcrv2y ago

“allegedly” aside, is this the only way to tackle the CSAM problem? I get a whif of a false dilemma here but I’m not sure if I have a blindspot

is requiring Oauth from Facebook, Google or Github for hosts something meaningful, necessary or the obligation of Jitsi Meet to do at all

salawat2y ago

No, it isn't. Jitsi is free to offer a signup and run an LDAP directory of their own. They do not need to federate with FAANG.

If they still wish to do any sort of reporting or eavesdropping on content, something they claim to be specifically impossible, yet somehow they've unearthed, that is their perogative I suppose.

Personally, I think <insert law enforcement authority> of some sort has made rumblings or threats about them daring to run an uneavesdroppable open comms service, so once again, nice things cannot be had, and everyone is happy to torch the ability to low-frictionly connect between arbitrary people because of the CSAM boogeyman, which no evidence has been brought forth to assert the existence of. In fact, there's been no evidence brought forth that there is any sort of worthwhile reason other than "Jitsi wants in on monetizing user's contact meta info".

xulresOP2y ago

In every thread someone comes with "but is this the only way to tackle the problem?" Noone ever even makes a suggestion so I guess yes it's the only way.

yieldcrv2y ago

that’s mentally negligent.

the only people that have to identify problems and solutions are founders that are grifting for capital or customers. and that’s sad.

the rest of rational actors can see a false dilemmas from afar without knowing what the third and fourth and fifth possibilities are.

in this case its pretty obvious that “privacy for hosts, or not via FAANG Oauth and an unaccountable change in the terms of service to further distance from privacy” is a false dilemma while also not preventing anonymous CSAM rooms on their service.

3 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ComputerGuru2y ago

I personally think it was likely/almost certainly the case. That doesn’t change the fact that without sufficient actual evidence it remains “allegedly.”

zozbot2342y ago

Well, the announcement talks about clear-cut ToS violations. Maybe it was about illegally streamed soccer matches - that's a bit of a plague as of late.

Vinnl2y ago

I mean, it could also be beheadings, revenge porn, doxxing, etc. Lots of clear-cut violations that are more serious than illegally streamed soccer matches.

But the true answer is probably "all of the above".

pengaru2y ago

lnxg33k12y ago

Piracy is still the best way/our best chance to get rid of soccer and all the nothingness that it involves in terms of drama, gossip, etc

1 more reply

yieldcrv2y ago

“allegedly” aside, is this the only way to tackle the CSAM problem? I get a whif of a false dilemma here but I’m not sure if I have a blindspot

is requiring Oauth from Facebook, Google or Github for hosts something meaningful, necessary or the obligation of Jitsi Meet to do at all

salawat2y ago

No, it isn't. Jitsi is free to offer a signup and run an LDAP directory of their own. They do not need to federate with FAANG.

If they still wish to do any sort of reporting or eavesdropping on content, something they claim to be specifically impossible, yet somehow they've unearthed, that is their perogative I suppose.

xulresOP2y ago

In every thread someone comes with "but is this the only way to tackle the problem?" Noone ever even makes a suggestion so I guess yes it's the only way.

yieldcrv2y ago

that’s mentally negligent.

the only people that have to identify problems and solutions are founders that are grifting for capital or customers. and that’s sad.

the rest of rational actors can see a false dilemmas from afar without knowing what the third and fourth and fifth possibilities are.

3 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse