Live data from Hacker News

WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

theverge.com

291–300 of 372 posts

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#291
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because once that functionality is there it affects everyone, not just in the US. The functionality to detect CSAM uploaded to Apple’s servers or sent to pre-teens? > And it basically means we sell out our democratic principles What democratic principle is being sold out?

The right to secret communication. The right of not being under surveillance. The government cannot open letters without a warrant, but somehow Apple, Google, MS and co can sniff through electronic communication as they see fit because of a clause in an EULA. No idea how came there, but maybe the days when Stasi surveillance was the poster child of government intrusion into private life are too long gone to be rememb…

> The government cannot open letters without a warrant, but somehow Apple, Google, MS and co can sniff through electronic communication

This is no different than a private doctor testing for illicit drugs and reporting results to the DEA (they literally do this for ADHD patients.)

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#292
post #20

What is striking is that a lot of misinformation is spreading around. How it works, what is behind it, what the alternatives could be, and especially what problem it tries to solve. This tweet here gives interesting options to learn more about it https://twitter.com/yoyoel/status/1424154582372872192?s=20 I have no imagination of the suffering of the kids behind it and it's definitely good that we fight it. But why no…

It isn't. It's the worst one.

Please elaborate. If as others have stated that this will enable E2E encryption in the cloud, then it very well might be?

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>phone with facebook app preinstalled and unremovable I've never used a phone like this, but are you also forced to provide FB credentials during initial setup? If not, then is the FB app just being installed a privacy threat if it is never used? Is it still accessing information on the phone without being tied directly to you?

I have had a phone that had a Facebook application preinstalled, and prevented removal of said application. Setting up the phone did not require FB credentials. I would be worried that even without logging into Facebook or giving it my credentials, my FB-ized phone would help FB's efforts in creating and maintaining shadow profiles. As far as I'm concerned, since the FB app is tied into the OS so tightly that it cann…

Deactivating the app is usually possible and is equivalent to uninstalling it on Android. It still takes some room in the system partition but you cannot use it anyway. Unless you root your phone, in which case you can also remove the app entirely.

These preinstalled apps are still crap though, I'd rather have a smaller system partition and a bigger user data partition, should I own such a phone.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scanning was already a problem. A lesser one, as not using Google or iCloud avoided it. Now I can't, because technically Apple can now look directly at the phone. No idea hey it is so hard to get that difference.

Technically, Google can look directly into Android phones. There is no difference.

How?

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#295
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads like a pre-prepared rant. > It's definitely the last straw for me in terms of apple products. Uhh and where else will you go where the grass is so much rosier privacy-wise?

Pixel4 with LineageOS (Non google apps) F-Droid and Nextcloud for Backup and sync....grass is rosy for me ;)

Same here. Doubles battery life too...

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Apple Music has gone to shit. iTunes keeps managing to get worse and worse, and they're pushing hard to pretend you don't have your own collection to get you to buy into the subscription model. At this point I'm going back to owning a seaparate dedicated music device that is totally divorced from the computer. There's just something intentional about walking over to a CD player or record player, picking out an a…

I recently started looking into buying my music again since 90% of my Apple Music listen time goes to the same generic piano playlist. I figure I could have bought the playlist 10 times over by now... My question is where do you buy music these days? I would like it digitally but I would like to own it (no DRM stuff). Any suggestions on a good store to buy music online? Last time I bought music I did it on itunes...

Bandcamp! No DRM, and also unlimited streaming of your purchases.

If most of your music is on major labels, then bandcamp may not be great for you.

I love it. I think I have around 300 purchases. It’s also great for discovering music. Much better than spotify in that regard.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#297
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS has been running complex Neural Nets on all your images for years now. It powers all their social features and search. Apple have always had the capability, and have been advertising it as central selling point of new versions of iOS for years. That ship sailed along time ago.

Neural Net might be overkill as an example. Antivirus software has existed since 1980s[1]. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antivirus_software

Does an AV report its findings to local govs?

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#298
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What changed is Apple just signaled to the governments of the world what it's willing to do toward abusing user privacy and exactly how it can work. And hey, Apple, if you're willing to do that, why not just go a bit further and do this, because we're asking you to or else (and now we know you're obviously even more morally flexible than what you used to present yourself as). Before that, Apple put up a front that th…

I think I disagree. Current move was improvement for user privacy, compared to what it used to be. Abuse is only on speculation, not on what has actually been done.

Speculation as in "whats technically possible".

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet. Once it's on the device, it's a MUCH smaller step to use it in other ways We crossed this bridge a long time ago. Apple already has on device Neural Nets processing everyone one of your on device photos. That’s what powers spotlight search and “photo memories”. Simple fact of the matter is that this isn’t the top of some slippery slope, it’s half way down one. A slope we started down when we figured out how to…

The key difference, of course, is that when the neural network classifies certain types of content, it doesn't forward it to a centralized server "for review"

And depending on that review you could find yourself on the other end of some "questioning" from law enforcement.

Yes, you might laugh and say that won't happen, but on-device scanning is the first step.

In less trustworthy countries it's not that farfetched to imagine what this can be used for.

So Apple must back down now or face the consequences in the form of loss of reputation and eventually loss of sales.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#300
> Kendra Albert, an instructor at Harvard’s Cyberlaw Clinic, has a thread on the potential dangers to queer children and Apple’s initial lack of clarity around age ranges for the parental notifications feature.

>> The idea that parents are safe people for teens to have conversations about sex or sexting with is admirable, but in many cases, not true. (And as far as I can tell, this stuff doesn't just apply to kids under the age for 13.) — Kendra Albert (@KendraSerra) August 5, 2021

>> EFF reports that the iMessage nudity notifications will not go to parents if the kid is between 13-17 but that is not anywhere in the Apple documentation that I can find. https://t.co/Ma1BdyqZfW — Kendra Albert (@KendraSerra) August 6, 2021

I'm against Apple forcing a backdoor onto every device, but this argument falls totally flat to me. Yes there are shitty parents out there, but despite that, parents still need the ability to parent. If Apple's "think of the children" arguments for their backdoor are wrong, then this "think of the children" argument against it is wrong too. There's nothing wrong with notifying parents that their pre-teen is doing someone they shouldn't be doing with their phone.

IMHO, I'd support the existence of such feature, but only as long as it's a user-installable option, not installed on every phone as part of the OS.

Post reply on HN