• gaael@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    The sex trafficker can absolutely be tracked by doing old-fashioned police work: you spend time, money and energy to infiltrate the network, gain their trust and eventually take them down. But this requires police funding and training.

    “if you’re doing nothing wrong, then why do you need to hide it?” An age-old dilemma.

    It’s not a dilemma, the answer has been given multiple times: under the rule of law, law enforcement has to prove (or at least demonstrate a strong suspiscion) that you’re involved in illegal activities before they can intrude in your privacy.
    But with the advent of mass data gathering and the exemple given by the NSA, all law enforcement agencies dream to change this paradigm.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      That “old-fashioned police work” IS very often communications monitoring. I have no problem with you saying a search warrant should be necessary, after all. Focus on the breaches of trust by the government institution for which you have some level of oversight, as opposed to providing a safe harbor for all nefarious communication in blanket form. It is thus not unreasonable to have Telegram provide some semblance of moderation and oversight to filter out obviously-nefarious, illegal activities while permitting the rest to pass-through uninterrupted. Communication isn’t wrong; demonstrably criminal communications, such as child sex trafficking communications, are. To think how many murders and sex-trafficking incidents were caught by the monitoring of communications following a warrant.

      Let’s instead focus on the transparent institutions moderating what is illegal to curb government overreach as opposed to providing a blanket safe-haven for mold to propagate. This is basically the Silk Road all over again, and for good reason that too was shut down.