awesome product!
One Bad Apple
351–360 of 557 posts
Re: One Bad Apple
#352I hear a Siren Outside
Someone has a serious problem.
Don't just shine it on.
Re: One Bad Apple
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The use of the detection algorithm is for iCloud only today . Yes, which is what I was saying in my comment. If or when it comes to Apple changing this then I would agree it's a battle worth fighting, but that is not what is happening here and that is not what I was correcting in this article itself. >The main issue is that the wall has been breached: The wall was breached when we opted to run proprietary OS systems…
Yes, which is what I was saying in my comment. If or when it comes to Apple changing this then I would agree it's a battle worth fighting, but that is not what is happening here and that is not what I was correcting in this article itself. Isn't it too late to fight the battle then? They've already built the infrastructure to make it trivial to scan any file on your device.
It's their operating system! Files are already "scanned" by their processes, how do you think they get from the camera to the hard drive?
Re: One Bad Apple
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
> someone usually mocks "it's always about the kids, think about the kids." To those critics: They have not seen the scope of this problem or the long term impact. What you are saying here kind of sidetracks the actual problem those critics have though, doesn't it? The problem is not the acknowledgement of how bad child abuse is. The problem is whether we can trust the people who claim that everything they do, they d…
What are the main instances where these claims were made fraudulently?
Snoopers Charter in the UK springs to mind.
Re: One Bad Apple
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
>About this time, someone usually mocks "it's always about the kids, think about the kids." To those critics: They have not seen the scope of this problem or the long term impact. There is nearly a 1-to-1 relationship between people who deal in CP and people who abuse children. And they rarely victimize just one child. Nearly 1 in 10 children in the US will be sexually abused before the age of 18. I think we have see…
The laws regarding CSAM/CSA are not the problem, they are fine. The problem is that we are expected to give up our rights in the vague notion of 'protecting children' while the same authorities actively ignore ongoing CSA. The Sophie Long case is an excellent example where the police has no interest in investigating allegations of CSA. Why is it that resources are spent policing CSAM but not CSA? It is because it is…
I agree that our current legal and law enforcement system isn't up to speed with 21st century internet. And it has to be updated, because this kind of makes the internet a de-facto law less space, covering everything from stalking, harassment over fraud to contraband trafficking and CSAM.
I don't think full scale surveillance is the way to go in free, democratic societies. It is the easiest one, so. Even more if surveillance can be outsourced to private, global tech companies. It saves the pain of passing laws.
Talking about laws, those along with legal proceedings should be brought up to speed. If investigators, based on existing and potential new laws, convince a court to issue a warrant to surveil or search any of my devices, fine. Because then I have legal options to react to that. Having that surveillance incorporated into some opaque EULA from a company in US, a company that now can enforce its standards on stuff I do, is nothing I would have thought would be acceptable. Not that I am shocked it is, I just wonder why that stuff still surprises me when it happens.
Going one step forward, if FANG manages to block right to repair laws it would be easy to block running non-approved OS on their devices. Which would than be possible to enforce by law. Welcome to STASI's wet dream.
Re: One Bad Apple
#356NCMEC has essentially shows that they have zero regard for privacy and called all privacy activists "screeching voices of the minority". At the same time, they're at the center point of a highly opaque, entrenched (often legally mandated) censorhip infrastructure that can and will get accounts shut down irrecoverably and possibly people's homes raided, on questionable data: In one of the previous discussions, I've se…
> I'm surprised, and honestly disappointed, that the author seems to still play nice, instead of releasing the whitepaper. I'm the author. I've worked with different parts of NCMEC for years. (I built the initial FotoForensics service in a few days. Before I wrote the first line of code, I was in phone calls with NCMEC about my reporting requirements.) Over time, this relationship grew. Some years, I was in face-to-f…
[deleted]
Re: One Bad Apple
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why shouldn't every Neuralink come with a mandated FBI module preinstalled? Where, if anywhere , is private life to remain, where citizens think and communicate freely? Is Xinjiang just the start for the whole world?
Do you see how this underlines my original point? I brought up real child abuse that is happening today and your response is about brain implants being mandated by the government. Most people are going prioritize the tangible problem over worrying about your sci-fi dystopia.
20 years ago a device 24*7 inspecting personal data of 60% citizens for samples remotely provided by government was sci-fi dystopia.
Re: One Bad Apple
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
> someone usually mocks "it's always about the kids, think about the kids." To those critics: They have not seen the scope of this problem or the long term impact. What you are saying here kind of sidetracks the actual problem those critics have though, doesn't it? The problem is not the acknowledgement of how bad child abuse is. The problem is whether we can trust the people who claim that everything they do, they d…
What are the main instances where these claims were made fraudulently?
One example I quote from EFF's post Apple's Plan to "Think Different" About Encryption Opens a Backdoor to Your Private Life [1] on the topic:
We’ve already seen this mission creep in action. One of the technologies originally built to scan and hash child sexual abuse imagery has been repurposed to create a database of “terrorist” content [2] that companies can contribute to and access for the purpose of banning such content. The database, managed by the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) [3], is troublingly without external oversight, despite calls from civil society [4]. While it’s therefore impossible to know whether the database has overreached, we do know that platforms regularly flag critical content [5] as “terrorism,” including documentation of violence and repression, counterspeech, art, and satire.
[1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/08/apples-plan-think-diff...
[2]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/08/one-database-rule-them...
[3]: https://gifct.org/
[4]: https://cdt.org/insights/human-rights-ngos-in-coalition-lett...
[5]: https://www.eff.org/wp/caught-net-impact-extremist-speech-re...
Re: One Bad Apple
#359NCMEC has essentially shows that they have zero regard for privacy and called all privacy activists "screeching voices of the minority". At the same time, they're at the center point of a highly opaque, entrenched (often legally mandated) censorhip infrastructure that can and will get accounts shut down irrecoverably and possibly people's homes raided, on questionable data: In one of the previous discussions, I've se…
> I'm surprised, and honestly disappointed, that the author seems to still play nice, instead of releasing the whitepaper. I'm the author. I've worked with different parts of NCMEC for years. (I built the initial FotoForensics service in a few days. Before I wrote the first line of code, I was in phone calls with NCMEC about my reporting requirements.) Over time, this relationship grew. Some years, I was in face-to-f…
Information is power and you can dethrone anyone with access to their communication. Just a quote out of context is enough, especially with many people out for blood to handle their doubts and fears.
A lot of people allegedly knew about Epstein and he was completely untouched while connected to high ranking politicians. You wouldn't have needed surveillance to identify child abuse and if it had turned up anything, I doubt something had happened. Even with that surveillance implemented, evidence would only be used if politically convenient.
If you are against child abuse, you should add funding to child care. People there will notice more abuse cases when they have the support and funding they need because that means more eyes on a potential problem. An image algorithm is no help.
Re: One Bad Apple
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, which is what I was saying in my comment. If or when it comes to Apple changing this then I would agree it's a battle worth fighting, but that is not what is happening here and that is not what I was correcting in this article itself. Isn't it too late to fight the battle then? They've already built the infrastructure to make it trivial to scan any file on your device.
It's their operating system! Files are already "scanned" by their processes, how do you think they get from the camera to the hard drive?
I'd imagine that they do that by writing the bits to the hard drive without creating a fuzzy hash used to match your picture with those in some organization's list?