Re:Addressing the distribution of illicit sexual content by ...
by mindslight on Wednesday June 07, 2023 @01:03PM
(#36229680)
> I personally find online content recommendations systems to be deeply problematic
I'm right there with you, and have wished for these needless centralizers to crash and burn for decades now. But if we imagine that Instagram/Twitter/etc were out of the picture and these kids were selling their wares on decentralized P2P platforms - it would seem that the main thing that would change would be a lack of possibility to centrally study and police the behavior. In other words point #2 and thus the whole focus of the article would vanish, yet the overall behavior would still exist. Looking at it in those terms, it feels a bit ridiculous to be pinning blame on centralized platforms for having not fully controlled their users, when a fully efficient market just wouldn't have those centralized choke points in the first place.
> selling self-generated illicit sexual content
There are at least three things going on here, done by three different entities:
1. Someone creates the material (the “SG-CSAM”). Let’s refrain from nitpicking about the A in CSAM there.
2. Someone operates (usually for profit!) the forum on which the material is transmitted. And some of these forums (accidentally?) help match buyers and sellers.
3. Someone buys (and I guess requests?) the material.
I think it’s pretty clear that #3 is frowned upon and is quite illegal in most jurisdictions.
The article is largely about #2.
#1 is interesting. It’s not the same thing as the usual concept of sexting. The article does not argue that #1 is or should be a crime.
I personally find online content recommendations systems to be deeply problematic, and the (emergent?) behavior of Instagram’s that the article discusses is rather distressing.