Our statement on the UK government’s demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the country be scanned, on the presumption of nudity, using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning. This proposal will not safeguard children. It endangers us all.
https://signal.org/blog/pdfs/2026-06-08-uk-surveillance-is-not-safety.pdf
@signalapp I think many of your points have merit, but what actually is your counter proposal to prevent online child criminal / sexual exploitation?
I work in field where CSE is an issue and am keen to know how you'd address it.
@plock @signalapp absolutely. The statement suggests the alternative solutions the government should consider are more money for education, more money for social services and increased regulation of AI. But none of these directly address CSE.
It basically says, "we appreciate you're robbing us because your kids are starving, but have you considered planting more crops instead?".
@plock the victims here are children, criminally exploited.
Tech companies will lose this political battle unless they come up with workable solutions.
@plock exactly. I agree with your point. I don't want Signal to lose this argument either as they're right about creeping surveillance. But if they think they can successfully fight it on the govt's turf - "spend more money on education! More social workers!" - they are going to lose.
Also: many of the kids most at risk really detest youth social services. Signal seem to be saying, govt. shouldn't regulate us, it should regulate vulnerable kids instead. It's not a winning argument imho.
Signal
🐕
khobochka
Paul Lockett