Paul Frambot 🦋
@paulframbot
There's an intriguing moral paradox in Pavel's arrest, and it is, to me, all about ownership. Car manufacturers aren't arrested because criminals use their car. However, Pavel was arrested because criminals used his app. I see a lot of people, including me, feeling bitter about this arrest and worried about what it means for their personal privacy and freedom. Yet, it's widely considered immoral to remain passive when one has the direct ability to prevent immoral actions, especially serious offenses like child exploitation. If Telegram's technology had been decentralized to the point where Pavel clearly couldn't influence what was happening on the platform, it's unlikely anyone would attempt to arrest him or accuse him of anything. Why? ... 1/2
10 replies
93 recasts
68 reactions
patxol 🔷 anser.social
@patxol.eth
He was not arrested because criminals used his platform. He was arrested because he refused to help the police identify criminals when he could. Child abusers. It appears that he got his French passport helping the same police identify terrorists. Weird double standards IMO. BTW, modern car manufacturers do help the police tracking criminals.
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Paul Frambot 🦋
@paulframbot
>BTW, modern car manufacturers do help the police tracking criminals. interesting i did not know. I guess "ownership" is not black or white. As soon as you have a form of control, people will push you to use it to trace back criminal activities
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
patxol 🔷 anser.social
@patxol.eth
Yes, in most countries, it is a crime to refuse to help arresting criminals, if you are able to. The best way to avoid that situation is to create systems that make you unable to get private information out of.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
