Perhaps the fundamental flaw in thinking behind this tactical error is that Apple thinks of your iPhone as their iPhone.
Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
231–240 of 860 posts
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#232> It's a complete change of narrative and there's no easy way to explain it and still defend Apple's Privacy narrative, wihout doing extreme mental gymnastics. Everyone who took Apple at their word was already doing extreme mental gymnastics because Apple's privacy stance was a farce on borrowed time to begin with. Now it's just blatantly obvious to everyone.
It’s only a “farce on borrowed time” because you have the benefit of hindsight.
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#233[deleted]
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#234This was such a weird way for them to announce that they’re no longer pursuing privacy as a differentiation strategy.
And that's all it ever was, perceived differentiation. They were never truly concerned with privacy ever.
Not really you were essentially immune to a lot of the ad spying and individual databases that google built up on you to sell to 3rd parties that advertised to you. Also apps were given much less freedom to spy on you or access your on device file. Apple just threw all the good sentiment they built up over google down the shitter and try to convince us otherwise with "think of the children".
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#235I just do not want Apple scanning my phone for the purpose of finding something they can send to the police. I’m not even talking about any “slippery slope” scenarios and I’ll never have any of the material they are looking for. And right or wrong, I don’t really fear a false identification, so this isn’t about a worry that they will actually turn me in. I just don’t want them scanning my phone for the purpose of tur…
This is the most honest take on this that I’ve seen. The slippery slope arguments don’t make sense, nor does the risk of false positives. But the idea of being suspected even in this abstract way, because of something other people do , is at the very least distasteful, bordering on offensive.
> distasteful
This is the word that most captures my feeling not just around the feature but how it was rolled out as well. Reading the PR announcement and then the leaked memo just felt - quite distasteful.
There are a number of things Apple has done and continues to do that fit into that category for me personally - the fact that iOS is so locked down for example.
But this really takes the cake. It's like someone at Apple dialed up the distasteful to 11 and let loose.
The whole industry does distasteful things but this is a harbinger of our inability to trust them at a deeper level. Not just Apple.
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#236I just do not want Apple scanning my phone for the purpose of finding something they can send to the police. I’m not even talking about any “slippery slope” scenarios and I’ll never have any of the material they are looking for. And right or wrong, I don’t really fear a false identification, so this isn’t about a worry that they will actually turn me in. I just don’t want them scanning my phone for the purpose of tur…
It's not scanning your device, but your iCloud uploads, and if configured, the imessages of your children
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#237[deleted]
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
So again, how is this different from Google Photos, Facebook messenger, etc etc? If this really was such an issue we would have hit it long ago. CSAM scanning is going occurring for photos that would be uploaded to iCloud.
because its scanning the content of the device, not what you did on the device. An iFrame full of CP downloaded from 4chan that fills the browser cache with CP just by visiting a harmless site would not go anywhere near Google Photos, Facebook messenger, etc etc It would trigger a scanner checking the browser cache for CP images. Those are just the obvious ways, by "rife" I mean there is any number of ways to get CP…
Good thing this system doesn’t scan browser cache, then. Unless you’re programmatically extracting photos from your browser cache and uploading them to iCloud, which would be a pretty impressive way to make sure you’re using up all your storage.
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
So again, how is this different from Google Photos, Facebook messenger, etc etc? If this really was such an issue we would have hit it long ago. CSAM scanning is going occurring for photos that would be uploaded to iCloud.
because its scanning the content of the device, not what you did on the device. An iFrame full of CP downloaded from 4chan that fills the browser cache with CP just by visiting a harmless site would not go anywhere near Google Photos, Facebook messenger, etc etc It would trigger a scanner checking the browser cache for CP images. Those are just the obvious ways, by "rife" I mean there is any number of ways to get CP…
But that’s not the proposed design. Browser cache isn’t getting advanced. It’s photos for iCloud.
I’m not asking if people do bad things, I’m saying over and over again this is getting coverage on Hn and people are pointing to this hypothetical issue — yet this hypothetical issue has been possible for years on many more devices.
Re: Apple's child protection features spark concern within its own ranks: sources
#240This CSAM Prevention initiative by Apple is a 180 degress change of their general message around privacy. Imagine investing hundreds of millions of dollars in pro-privacy programs, privacy features, privacy marketing, etc... just to pull this reverse card. Of course this is going to spark concern within their own ranks. It's like working for a food company that claims to use organic, non-processed, fair-trade ingredi…
Power 101: preach one thing do opposite