Comment

Comment on ‘What Was She Supposed to Report?:’ Police Report Shows How a High School Deepfake Nightmare Unfolded

Int_not_found@feddit.de ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Germany also has laws criminalizing insults. You can actually be prosecuted for calling someone an asshole, say. Americans tend to be horrified when they learn that. I wonder if feelings in that regard may be changing.

I don’t care about the feelings of Americans reading this. Tbh

Germany is a western liberal democracy, same as the US.

On the other hand I’m horrified, that you seem to equate a quick insult with Deepfake-Porn of Minors.

The police would also seize the records of internet services. I’d think some people would have concerns about the level of government surveillance here; perhaps that should be addressed.

Arguably the unrestricted access of government entities to this kind of data is higher in the US then the EU.

How does that relate to encryption, for example? Some services may feel that they avoid a lot of bother and attract customers by not storing the relevant data. Should they be forced?

There are many entities that store data about you. Maybe the specific service doesn’t cooperate. But what about the server-hoster, maybe the ad-network, maybe the app-store, certainly the payment processor.

If the police can layout how that data can help solve the case, providers should & can be forced by judges to give out that data to an certain extent. Both in the US and the EU

Does the German police commonly investigate this?

Insults? No, those are mostly a civil matter not a criminal one (Deepfake-) Porn of Minors? Yes certainly

source

Sort:hotnew top

General_Effort@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
What’s with the downvotes? Lemmy is usually pretty negative on the whole data gathering thing, I thought. Shouldn’t I have brought this up? I don’t get it.

source
General_Effort@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

On the other hand I’m horrified, that you seem to equate a quick insult with Deepfake-Porn of Minors.

I don’t. Maybe a language issue.

Arguably the unrestricted access of government entities to this kind of data is higher in the US then the EU.

Yes. The GDPR in particular means that service providers may not be allowed to collect the data you want to use for prosecution. Which is one reason I brought this up.

It is refreshing to see someone who is not at all concerned about privacy. I usually feel that people are far too concerned about surveillance. I don’t remember the last time that I felt that a bit more concern would be good.

For purposes of enforcement, the degree of surveillance allowed/mandated is important. The copyright industry has a large financial interest in tracking data on the net. I’m pretty sure that German High Schoolers don’t have too much trouble pirating media. This shows that there are practical limits to enforcing bans on internet services and data sharing. Technologically, a lot more surveillance would be possible. It would cost money that would have to be paid with the internet bill and through higher costs of various services. It would also have a chilling effect on various aspects of civil society.

Discussing the pros and cons of total surveillance goes too far from the topic, I think.

The question is simply: How well do you want this to be enforced and are you willing to pay the price (not only in money)?

Insults? No, those are mostly a civil matter not a criminal one

No, insults are firstly a criminal matter.

source