European police say KidFlix, "one of the largest pedophile platforms in the world," busted in joint operation.

[Guest]

With my luck I would try to find the video, end up getting my PC or phone infected with spyware or ransomware, and have a bad time. Yeah I rely on other humans to vet things.

[liz@midwest.social]

It's not an overpass. A loose brick falls off a truck going in the opposite direction, bounces off the pavement once, then goes through the windshield.

[blueether@no.lastname.nz]

Is that why Trump is so for them?

[surewhynotlem@lemmy.world]

universally condemned

There are a few countries that would disagree

[Guest]

Holy. Shit. This is somehow glorious on an oled iPad screen. The late 1900s never looked so good.

[muhyb@programming.dev]

Wow, with such a daring name as well. Fucking disgusting.

[deceptichum@quokk.au]

I used to love the dynamite tool!

[dan@upvote.au]

I loved the explosion sound, and the "oh no" when you click the undo button. I have the Windows versions of KidPix on CD somewhere.

[gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works]

Yeah, more or less

[gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works]

Omg I remember Kidpix! It was great!

This… not so much.

[gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works]

Thank you for given me a nostalgia jolt that I didn’t know I wanted, but am fully enjoying right now

[Guest]

Maybe the ransomware would be better than seeing the video

[Guest]

That’s unfortunately (not really sure) probably the fault of Germanys approach to that.
It is usually not taking these websites down but try to find the guys behind it and seize them. The argument is: they will just use a backup and start a “KidFlix 2” or sth like that.
Some investigations show, that this is not the case and deleting is very effective. Also the German approach completely ignores the victim side. They have to deal with old men masturbating to them getting raped online. Very disturbing…

[taladar@sh.itjust.works]

Which countries do you have in mind where videos of sexual child abuse are legal?

[taladar@sh.itjust.works]

Honestly, if the existing victims have to deal with a few more people masturbating to the existing video material and in exchange it leads to fewer future victims it might be worth the trade-off but it is certainly not an easy choice to make.

[theprotagonist@lemmy.world]

I think you are mixing here two different aspects of this and of similar past cases. I the past there was often a problem with takedowns of such sites, because german prosecutors did not regard themselves as being in charge of takedowns, if the servers were somewhere overseas. Their main focus was to get the admins and users of those sites and to get them into jail.

In this specific case they were observing this platform (together with prosecutors from other countries in an orchestrated operation) to gather as much data as possible about the structure, the payment flows, the admins and the users of this before moving into action and getting them arrested. The site was taken down meanwhile.

If you blow up and delete)such a darknet service immediately immediately upon discovery, you may get rid of it (temporarily) but you might not catch many of the people behind it.

[recall519@lemm.ee]

This feels like one of those things where couch critics aren't qualified. There's a pretty strong history of three letter agencies using this strategy successfully in other organized crime industries.

[theprotagonist@lemmy.world]

This has nothing to do with privacy! Criminals have their techniques and methods to protect themselves and their "businesses" from discovery, both in the real world and in the online world. Even in a complete absence of privacy they would find a way to hide their stuff from the police - at least for a while.

In the real world, criminals (e.g. drug dealers) also use cars, so you could argue, that druck trafficking is a side effect of people having cars...

[prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

with a catchy name clearly thought up by a marketing person

A marketing person? They took "Netflix" and changed the first three letters lol

[cethin@lemmy.zip]

Well, it does have to do with privacy and security, it just doesn't matter if it's legal or not for them. These people (in the US) always make a point that criminals will buy guns whether it's legal or not, but then they'll argue they need to destroy privacy because criminals are using it. It doesn't make sense, but it doesn't need to because honesty or consistency aren't important.