comment: >
context: I remember when they raided his home, and some "news" sites I follow said it was an attack on journalists by the Biden admin. I guess not.... >
  
  When ABC reporter James Gordon Meek was arrested in October, Tucker Carlson said he couldn't "really guess as to what's really going on here" but it could be a sign the U.S. is "a dictatorship... that goes after journalists." 
  Why does Tucker Carlson cover for pedophiles? >
  
  His nickname is “toucher”. >
  
  Toucher YarSon >
  
  
  Dropbox filed a tip
  
  I'm glad he got caught, but... what a dumbass. >
  
  And his username was his real name… >
  
  Aww snap. >
  
  "Ex-ABC News journalist arrested and accused of possessing child pornography"
  
  NBC News >
  
  Yeah that’s a lot of shade right there. Terrible title and seems like they are trying to hurt the competition without cause. >
  
  How? He was a journalist with ABC up until he got raided. That's just a matter of fact. >
  
  Based on the evidence so far, the pornography isn't even the worst thing he's done. >
  
  Yikes, I haven't been following. Are you saying the evidence shows he may have abused kids himself? 
  Not exactly a surprising stretch if that’s the case, and I hope he is out away for a very very long time. >
  
  In messages he sent he says he abused a toddler. >
  
  Ugh, ugh ugh. So awful. May he burn in hell. >
  
  I had no idea he was a republican >
  
  Yet another pedophile who turns out to be a straight white male and not a gay or trans person. Tell us again who the real threat is, Republicans... >
  
  Don't forget straight white women. I think heard of two separate teachers arrested for "special relationships" (as far as the media is concerned; it's only rape if it's a girl apparently) with their male students last week. >
  
  There was a story like that a few months ago, and because the rapist was pretty attractive, plenty of conservatives were cheering it on. Tons of "Wish I'd been raped by someone like that at that kid's age" comments. >
  
  "put an m&m suit on her and eerrrrrhhhhhhhnbnbbnn" >
  
  Two words in this report make me want to vomit. "5 years" which he won't do. It should be 60 years and get out in 40. >
  
  The sentence should be one year in the electric chair. >
  
  A year? Jeez, imagine that electric bill. >
  
  Turning to carbon emissions is too good for him >
  
  There shouldn't be ANY platform that would house, store, distribute or transfer child pornography in any format. Transmitting child pornography isn't a privacy issue. It's an extremely illegal activity that should NEVER be protected by privacy laws. >
  
  I think the point they've awkwardly tried to hit on is this:  how did dropbox determine that the file(s) were CP?
  If I kept pics of my son in the tubbie, would they get flagged?  Are they scanning all my pictures with some algorithm?  And what happens when a picture gets flagged?  Does a human actually review it?  etc.
  I think there's enough room here to say that obviously CP is bad and to hell with anyone who has it, but also that dropbox scanning my pictures is bad too. >
  
  I'd rather software flag thousands of kids in bathtubs and send that to law enforcement agencies for discernable review than arbitrarily decide what the intended purpose of those pics are. If you set parameters on what kind of naked pictures of children are okay to send to people, then child sex traffickers learn the rules too. As soon as they learn the rules, they learn how to skirt the rules. 
  Is that the world you want to live in? One where we make child sex offenders and traffickers smarter? I sure as hell don't. If you really want someone to see your child naked in the bathtub, then as weird as that is, accept the risk of being flagged and error on the side of protecting children from monsters. >
  
  This is giving "well it's better to have the PATRIOT act than not"
  And honestly, I think you're not giving this the full weight of thought that it deserves.  A false positive on something like this going to law enforcement is a life-ender.  I'm not even talking about sending pics, either.  I'm talking about simply possessing pictures of my own kid, stored in my own dropbox.
  Just being charged is enough to completely ruin your entire career and social life.  I don't think it's good policy to collide with law enforcement every time an algorithm flags something.
  But whatever, I get that everyone's blood is up on the subject so I'll take my downvotes and move on.