Privacy

I think this is a difficult dilemma. My immediate instinct is that blocking illegal material is obviously an invasion of privacy. It is impossible to block one type of message without first reading all messages and classifying them.

But on the other hand, we're talking about other people's servers here. They shouldn't have to host illegal material. In fact, it is illegal for them to do so. So it is their right to know what they're hosting and clean it out.

Should we really have any expectation of privacy on big tech platforms? If you're sending obviously illegal material in plain bytes to a Microsoft server, what do you think is going to happen?

Oh hey big tech, how about you guys manage to make your products not suck and maybe then you get to have an opinion on matters.

Not fooling anyone with this.

Yes, the companies that kowtow to the pedophile with the finger over the red button are upset about child protection.

They're upset about EU's privacy laws?

Good. EU is clearly doing something right.

Big tech whose business model partially depends on getting children hooked on low quality but rapidly changing content of almost infinite variation (atleast by human life span measure). Lets start for instance by asking which of these platforms allowed prime drink ads. That already eliminates everything except Microsoft probably.

I found this article interesting because big tech seems to care so much about scanning, that they are pushing on this.

Unfortunately the article doesn't really delve into the privacy precedents and implications it would set, and mostly voices the arguments of big tech.