Live data from Hacker News

Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

lapcatsoftware.com

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#331
post #11

"I don't understand most of the technical details of Apple's blog post" I do: - Client side vectorization: the photo is processed locally, preparing a non-reversible vector representation before sending (think semantic hash). - Differential privacy: a decent amount of noise is added the the vector before sending it. Enough to make it impossible to reverse lookup the vector. The noise level here is ε = 0.8, which is q…

> I'm not sure what the right call is here. I am sure. The right call is to never send any data from the device to anyone unless the user explicitly tells the device to do it. The only thing the device should do is whatever its user tells it to do. The user didn't tell it to do this. Apple did. > But the conclusion "Thus, the only way to guarantee computing privacy is to not send data off the device." isn't true Irre…

Complete nonsense. *All networked devices do things behind their users back* at this point, and have for years, and do not ask for consent for most of it. And users would REJECT granular opt-in as a terrible UX.

Let's look at the primary alternative, Android. It generally does not provide you this level of granular control on network access either without rooted hacks. Apps and the phone vendor can do whatever they want with far less user control unless you're a deep Android nerd and know how to install root-level restriction software.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#332
I don't mind the whole use of ML based features even if it requires elaborate schemes to run some computation in the cloud in some privacy preserving manner.

However I do see that Apple marketing campaign tried to fool people into thinking somehow non Apple are not private and only Apple provides privacy.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#333
post #11

"I don't understand most of the technical details of Apple's blog post" I do: - Client side vectorization: the photo is processed locally, preparing a non-reversible vector representation before sending (think semantic hash). - Differential privacy: a decent amount of noise is added the the vector before sending it. Enough to make it impossible to reverse lookup the vector. The noise level here is ε = 0.8, which is q…

Isn’t this 95% the same as Apple’s CSAM scanning paper?

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#334

Is this just a smokescreen around slowly sneaking CSAM scanning back in after the pushback last time? The "default on" behavior is suspect. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/apple-photo-scanning-csam-commun...

Yup, this is their way of injecting the "phone home" element via an innocuous rationale, "location matching". The global index will of course also match against other markers they deem worthy of matching, even if they don't return that to the user.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#335
post #292

What I want is very simple: I want software that doesn't send anything to the Internet without some explicit intent first . All of that work to try to make this feature plausibly private is cool engineering work, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with implementing a feature like this, but it should absolutely be opt-in. Trust in software will continue to erode until software stops treating end users and their data…

[deleted]

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#336
post #319
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably a pretty large set of people, perhaps even the majority, since I'd suspect that most people don't pay for additional iCloud storage and can't fit their photo library into 5GB. In fact, I'm willing to bet that if they'd added this feature and gated it behind iCloud Photos being enabled, we'd have different articles complaining about Apple making a cash grab by trying to get people to pay for premium stor…

> It's probably a pretty large set of people, perhaps even the majority As the article notes, this new feature is so "popular" that neither Apple nor the Apple media have bothered to mention it. AFAICT it's not even in Apple's document listing all the new features of iOS 18: https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-18/pdf/iOS_18_All_New_Features...

True, but I don't see how that relates to anything? You asked for a hypothetical set of people who'd have iCloud Photos disabled but would accept metadata being sent to Apple for better search. I can't help you if you want to move the goalposts after I give you that.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The average smartphone is probably doing a hundred things you didn’t knowingly consent to every second. You've succinctly identified a (maybe the ) huge problem in the computing world today. Computers should not do anything without the user's command/consent. This seems like a hopeless and unachievable ideal only because of how far we've already strayed from the light. Even Linux, supposedly the last bastion of use…

> You've succinctly identified a (maybe the) huge problem in the computing world today. And getting downvoted for saying it, which is a fascinating incongruity.

It’s amazing how hostile Silicon Valley (and HN commenters) are to the basic idea of consent. It’s as if simply asking the user for permission is a grave insult to these technologists. “I shouldn’t have to ask permission! It implies I’m doing something bad!” they might be thinking.

If the world was a nightclub, “Silicon Valley” would be a creepy guy who walks up to every woman and says “You’re now dating me. To stop, you need to opt out using a form that I will do my best to make sure you can’t read.”

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#338

Let’s step back and go through the thought process of the team that’s implementing this feature. If they leave the feature disabled by default most likely casual users will never use it because they won’t be able to find the setting buried under all the menus. Thus after adding all their privacy layers the team felt that it should be safe enough to enable by default while remaining true to the company’s ethos of priv…

> The author of the article goes on to show his bias against Apple

My bias against Apple, as someone who exclusively uses and develops software for Apple products? I've been a loyal Mac user for over 20 years.

It's so ridiculous when people make an accusation like this. For better or worse, I'm married to Apple platforms.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#339
post #332

I don't mind the whole use of ML based features even if it requires elaborate schemes to run some computation in the cloud in some privacy preserving manner. However I do see that Apple marketing campaign tried to fool people into thinking somehow non Apple are not private and only Apple provides privacy.

This obviously requires location services to be enabled. Why does this need ML? Hit a GIS lookup API with the lat/long of the photo.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The average smartphone is probably doing a hundred things you didn’t knowingly consent to every second. You've succinctly identified a (maybe the ) huge problem in the computing world today. Computers should not do anything without the user's command/consent. This seems like a hopeless and unachievable ideal only because of how far we've already strayed from the light. Even Linux, supposedly the last bastion of use…

> You've succinctly identified a (maybe the) huge problem in the computing world today. And getting downvoted for saying it, which is a fascinating incongruity.

> incongruity

Or signal of non-named stakeholders.

Post reply on HN