191–200 of 713 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not the role of infrastructure providers to reach into private, on device content. That is like the USPS opening every letter and scanning what is inside. Even if it's done with machine learning, that is absolutely not okay, no matter what it is for.
Agreed, but not like we have a choice with that matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I similarly draw other crimes being committed, the same does not apply. Why is that? The answer is much more simple than you seem to think it is. Because the law doesn't say it is. I can only go by the law in my country, which is that (loosely translated) 'ownership of any image of someone looking like a minor in a sexually suggestive position' is a crime. Since a drawing is an image, it's a crime. Having an ima…
Yeah but he's using reducto-ad-absurdem to illustrate the law as written is absurd in some cases. So yes you can pedanticly cite the law and have an answer to the question, but you're missing the larger discussion. At somepoint somebody is gonna actually have to tackle that looking at images, especially fake ones, might not only be harmless, it might be safer to let people get release from their fantasies (I'd be cur…
While I do agree that drawings being illegal might not be in anyone's best interest, that doesn't have anything to do with the questions I asked.
> At somepoint somebody is gonna actually have to tackle that looking at images, especially fake ones, might not only be harmless, it might be safer
I thought I agreed with you for a second, buy "especially fake ones" implies you think that child pornography is actually a good thing. I hope I'm wrong about that.
> Some day, people will say "Obviously nobody cares if you possess it or look at it, obviously, it's just about MAKING it."
Guess I'm not and you really think possession of child pornography is harmless. My god that's depressing.
If you are reasoning from the standpoint that the ownership and trade of child pornography is harmless, yes, then I understand that giving up privacy in order to reduce this is a bad thing. Because in your eyes, you're giving up privacy, but you gain nothing.
US Government: We suspect the person in this photo of committing a crime. Here is your subpoena, Apple. You are directed to scan all iPhone and iCloud storage for any pictures matching this NeuralHash and report to us where you find them. Chinese Government: Here is the NeuralHash for Tienanmen square. Delete all photos you find matching this or we will bar you from China. Apple has at this point already admitted thi…
Yeah as I mentioned down the thread, once you act against the users, you're dead. I'm done. They are going from my life. Good job it's ebay 80% off fees this weekend here in the UK.
US Government: We suspect the person in this photo of committing a crime. Here is your subpoena, Apple. You are directed to scan all iPhone and iCloud storage for any pictures matching this NeuralHash and report to us where you find them. Chinese Government: Here is the NeuralHash for Tienanmen square. Delete all photos you find matching this or we will bar you from China. Apple has at this point already admitted thi…
The Chinese government already has direct access to everyone's data and messages. There is no encryption. This is mandated. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...
From what I understand, only to Chinese customers's data and messages (bad enough, sure, but not as bad as you say).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"They're going to scan your phone and probably have someone review any photos with a lot of human flesh in them" would be enough to get a lot of non-technical users to take notice. That would get a lot of people nervous. Let alone anyone smart who thinks through the implications here of how far the line is being pushed on how public your phone is.
Simply turning off iCloud Photos will ensure that photos on your iPhone are never scanned. Why are you trying to make this thing about photos stored on-device? Photos in iCloud have always been available to Apple through iCloud backups. If you are concerned about privacy, turn it off. "And it does so while providing significant privacy benefits over existing techniques since Apple only learns about users’ photos if t…
How would that help catch them if they can simply flip the switch?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not the role of infrastructure providers to reach into private, on device content. That is like the USPS opening every letter and scanning what is inside. Even if it's done with machine learning, that is absolutely not okay, no matter what it is for.
Though we were okay with Gmail doing the same because "hey, it's free!". But I understand your concern here. All our lives are now digitalised and maybe stored forever somewhere and anything you do, even if completely benign, could be considered a crime in some country or even in your own country in a few years from now.
I know the privacy approach Apple has been pushing was just marketing, but I didn't care too much because I enjoyed my iPhone and M1 macbook. Because of this decision (and the fact that my iPhone more-or-less facilitates poor habits throughout my life), I'm considering moving completely out of the Apple ecosystem. Does anyone have any recommendations for replacements? * On laptops: I have an X1 carbon extreme running…
Laptop | Desktop: https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/overview/cp/linuxsystem... Router: https://www.turris.com/en/omnia/overview/ Media Center: https://osmc.tv/vero/ Cloud (Use TrueNAS Scale): https://www.truenas.com/systems-overview/ Phone: https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ Watch: https://pine64.com/product/pinetime-smartwatch-sealed/ Smart Thermostat: https://hestiapi.com/product/hestiapi-touch-one-free-shippin..…
I'm waiting for orthodox authorities to do stuff like reporting pictures of people (not just girls) without head coverings. or dressed in bikinis, thongs, or underwear (like a significant number of "influencers" do, every day). There are already places in this world, where a couple can be arrested for kissing in public. I suspect that the folks enforcing those laws, would have some real interest in this capability. N…
Or manipulating photos a little so the classifier deems them dangerous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXy6oX1iNoA
https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there is a very deep and troublesome philosophical issue here. Ceci n'est pas une pipe. A picture of child abuse /is not/ child abuse. Let me ask you a counter-question. If I am able to draw child pornography so realistically that you couldn't easily tell, am I committing a crime by drawing?
A picture of child abuse is child abuse in that the abuse of a child was necessary to take the picture in the first place. If the picture had no grounds to spread, it would likely not have been made—no incentive. As such, the fact that the picture is able to spread indirectly incentivises further physical abuse to children.
People have made all of these points before, but I still wonder what the legal and/or practical basis of the law is when the pictures or videos are entirely synthetic.
On another note, I wonder how much of this kind of Apple(tm) auto-surveillance magic has made it into the MacOS.