Re: Mozilla are only partly right
The problem is more complex than that though.
As a society we accepted the introduction of CleanFeed on the basis (as you say) that stopping paedophiles from finding things online is good.
However, Cleanfeed has long since stopped being *just* about that content. Because the infra was there and capable of doing so, the ISPs were ordered to use it to block Newzbin2 (a torrent site).
At that point, Cleanfeed's effectiveness was doomed because there was now an "acceptable" reason to be discussing how to circumvent it - prior to that decision those discussions could only happen if you were interested in looking for something very, very illegal.
It's not like it's stopped there either, we're now in a position where the Govt wants providers to track who watches what adult content, and with the threat of using that same infra to block sites that fail to comply with the requirements. Their aspirations don't end there either, have a search around and you'll see plans to bring in age verification for all kinds of things.
I agree that blocking the sites on the IWF's watchlist (when they don't screw it up, anyway) is a good thing. But it is the government, and industry who've moved us into the position we're in now.
Now, you've mentioned surveys to bolster your argument. In most surveys, most Brits didn't know about the impending (now delayed) porn block. Think they'll still support censorship when they're being asked to proof of identity before watching their chosen fetish? What about when a future Govt decides that dwarves are immoral and blocks any sites carrying them?
What about the Govt's self-confessed position that the porn-block may push users onto the darknet where they may be exposed to things that are much more extreme? (and yes, that includes CP).
The IWF wants this positioned as a fight against paedophiles, but it's not that simplistic, and not by a very, very long stretch. 15 years ago, it would have been, but the courts and the Govt have perverted the underlying system and it was a given that at somepoint their tower of cards was going to come crashing down.
Just one final point:
> paedophiles should not be able to trade images online, and is happy for Cleanfeed to exist.)
You do understand that Cleanfeed does precisely nothing to prevent this, and isn't even intended to do so right?
Cleanfeed exists to stop people accidentally stumbling onto this type of content. The aim being to prevent someone who's not yet into child porn (or marginally so), stumbling upon it and then exploring looking for more.
Those who are actively seeking it out already know about Cleanfeed, as well as the risks if they're caught and so take measures to bypass it. It was *always* understood that this would be the case.
I mention this primarily because the protection of Cleanfeed isn't nearly what you're trying to portray it as. Pictures still get circulated (unfortunately) Cleanfeed just helps keep it from the sight of the general population.