[AusNOG] More legislative interventions

[Scott Wilson]

I feel like legislation will compel tech companies to implement human
screening in some capacity, and there will be huge downsides to that - I
mean, which is more likely:

a) screening team members are offered abundant mental health support
resources, given follow-through on reporting (that video you flagged last
year resulted in a conviction and a jail sentence, congratulations!) and
are limited to short periods...

or:

b) screening team members are a minimum wage disposable/contractor/gig
economy workforce, desperate for any income, performance tracked to the
extreme (we require 55 minutes of video content viewed per hour) and
discarded when they inevitably burn out?

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:45, Nick Stallman <nick at agentpoint.com> wrote:

> I didn't know Tineye could tell if an image was violent or not.
>
> The existing systems work for copyright purposes, finding a similar match.
> This works to some extent currently, and can handle recompression,
> scaling, etc...
> It falls apart when an adversary wants to get around it however.
>
> But for the case that this legislation is targeting, i.e. taking down
> violent video, fingerprinting is useless.
> It's brand new content - completely impossible to detect in advance.
> You can only remove the content after it's been distributed for quite
> some time, not pre-emptively which is what the politicians want.
>
> On 10/4/19 11:16 am, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> > https://tineye.com/search/f274c3b49edcca9a6d83994a43629445a5ea5a23/
> >
> > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:12, Matt Palmer <mpalmer at hezmatt.org
> > <mailto:mpalmer at hezmatt.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:56:12AM +1000, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> >     > Now I would say that for instance, if the eSecurity Director
> >     posts the CRC
> >     > of a file as being "abhorrent violent" content, and your company
> >     doesn't
> >     > expeditiously take down that material, expect problems down the
> >     pike. I
> >     > doubt a CRC check alone is sufficient.
> >
> >     Given that a CRC changes if you modify any bit of the file, and
> >     common CRC
> >     implementations have a space of either 16 or 32 bits (65,536 and
> >     ~4 billion
> >     possible values, respectively), "insufficient" doesn't even begin to
> >     describe such a scheme.
> >
> >     > I'd say a fingerprinting system to
> >     > match altered copies of the subject file should be implemented.
> >
> >     Once again with this magical "figerprinting" scheme.  Nothing like
> >     what
> >     you're describing actually exists.  Further, there's no point in each
> >     company coming up with their own scheme for calculating this magical
> >     fingerprint, because if the eSecurity Director wants to say "take
> down
> >     everything like this fingerprint" they have to use the *same*
> >     scheme to come
> >     up with the same fingerprint.
> >
> >     > It doesn't have to work in all cases.
> >
> >     It won't work in *any* case.
> >
> >     > I am not a lawyer. This is not expert advice.
> >
> >     Yes, I think that is quite evident.
> >
> >     - Matt
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     AusNOG mailing list
> >     AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> >     http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> --
> Nick Stallman
> Technical Director
> Email   nick at agentpoint.com <mailto:nick at agentpoint.com>
> Phone   02 8039 6820 <tel:0280396820>
> Website         www.agentpoint.com.au <https://www.agentpoint.com.au/>
>
>
> Agentpoint <https://www.agentpoint.com.au/>
> Netpoint <https://netpoint.group/>
>
> Level 3, 100 Harris Street, Pyrmont NSW 2009    Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/agentpoint/> Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/agentpoint> Instagram
> <https://www.instagram.com/Agentpoint/> Linkedin
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/agentpoint-pty-ltd>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20190410/79ffc4dc/attachment.html>