• Vent@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    172
    ·
    1 year ago

    “If it can be done and it is done, for example, for crimes such as child pornography, for intellectual property, which is stealing, they should have to do it too.” - LaLiga chief Javier Tebas

    Ah yes, two equivalent crimes: CSAM and… um… watching sports without paying

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        The slippery slope is a fallacy only because there’s no proof things will go one way or the other. You can use slippery slope to say ridiculous things. E.g “if we let gays marry, it’ll be pedos next” is a good example of the fallacy whereas “if we let private corporations spy on us for a good reason, they’ll expand their powers to extract even more profit” is not, but either way, you need to know the context (which is that corporations serve to extract maximum possible wealth and have no morals).

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          The problem is that slippery slopes are often real, and citing it as a fallacy is normally done to dismiss the idea that it could be real, without making an argument. As you say, whether one thing will lead to another depends on circumstances. But a fallacy is supposed to be an argument that is wrong because of faulty logic. A claim that one thing will lead to another can be wrong, but I would say that it’s almost always wrong because the underlying premise is wrong, not because there is a claim of an existence of a slippery slope. For example the “gay marriage -> child abuse” rhetoric is coming from religious conservatives who likely believe that strict adherence to their religious rules and practice is the main thing keeping society from “degeneracy” and general bad behavior. Given the premise, the conclusion isn’t illogical, the problem is that the premise is wrong. Instead of calling it a fallacy, it would be a better argument to have the premise clarified, and make an argument against its merits.

          In the case of the OP situation, I would say that when a company is actively using tools to examine and control the contents of a user’s device, that makes it more plausible for demands that they expand what they do this for will be followed. I’m sure plenty of people would try to dismiss that as a fallacy, but really it’s a claim about how things work.

          • LUD1T3@mastodon.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            @chicken @boonhet It’s a difference between deductive and inductive reasoning. The slippery slope is a logical fallacy because it doesn’t actually PROVE its conclusion. That doesn’t mean the conclusion is wrong, just that the argument doesn’t prove it (though it may insinuate many possible conclusions). Other corroborating evidence can lend itself to a reasonable suspicion, or even a strong inductive argument, but it falls short of logical certainty.

            • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              because it doesn’t actually PROVE its conclusion

              Hardly any casual arguments do though. Almost every argument you see on the internet is a stated claim only, with the reasoning only implied. You don’t see those being called fallacies.

  • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    ·
    1 year ago

    They fucking finally said the quiet part loud! Make a dystopian filtering system with CSAM as an excuse, then use it for filtering piracy, unauthorized gambling sites (but just because they’re not paying the taxes, not because actually caring about the citizens mental health), and so on

    • Kernal64@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      The UK just passed this exact law. They say it’s to protect children, but it requires all companies to build a backdoor into their end to end encryption specifically so they can spy on users for “inappropriate material that is harmful to children.”

      • Gamey@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is that the one that explicitely includes “positive depictions of refugees arriving” in the laws text?

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How can it do that?

    And won’t people just use piracy websites?

    And Google already scans users phones and deletes apps?

    • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s an emergency function that google silently introduced in all phones years ago. Theoretically it should be used if an app is widespread malware

          • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s the only component? If so, CalyxOS, GrapheneOS, LineageOS, and similar would be protected against this, since they have neither Play Services nor Play Protect. Am I correct in my understanding?

            • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, because they can always push anything over Play Services updates. But right now it does disable it.

          • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s overkill, with a rooted phone you can simply freeze (might be able to freeze it with ADB as well) or delete the Play store (it’s the Play Store where this Malware lives). GMS and Account Manager will work just fine without the Play store.

            Or, like the other person said you can just disable Play Protect.

          • Gamey@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I just wish theu finalky fixed it, the rate limiting is really damn annoying by now! I started to sideload apps from apkpure and update them with Aurora to keep my anonymous user account but it can’t take long till that’s gone too I guess! :(

              • Gamey@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well, Aurora is the only one and it’s jalf broken and has a history of lacking development so the situation isn’t great but I don’t plan to ever get Play Services again ether

                • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  The only open source one, yes. But since the Apps in the store are proprietary too, i just have both (in my case Aptoide) in Shelter with Tracker Control.

                • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  All 10 proprietary apps i use don’t, including Post, transportation, banking and Twint. Only thing that doesn’t work is some ads in the 2 games i have. I don’t know, maybe swiss companies are late in the enshitification game?

  • Gamey@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Once again I feel quite comfortable without Google Play serives on my device!

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    As soon as google starts removing sideloaded apps forcefully without play protect, will be the time when Apples market share increases.

    Apk sideloading freedom is the only major difference left between Android and iOS