531–540 of 713 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Apple feature discussed here is for photos being synched to iCloud Photos. It does not scan arbitrary local content.
They already can decrypt iCloud photos, why else perform an on-device scan ? If not with the intention to scan all local contents ?
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…
Apple: hey govt, here's some probable cause.
Govt: warrant, search, arrest
User: prosecuted
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you believe that sexual predators sharing images with children on iPhones is a problem? > It has nothing to do with not recognizing another side. It seems like you are simply stating that the other side’s priorities are wrong. That seems like a reasonable belief that won’t help anyone with the problem of creeping surveillance.
Do you believe you can stop people from sharing imagines pre-determined to be exploitative and illegal by a central authority who has already logged and recorded the hash of that photo with children by deploying a universal scan system to all phones - when phones aren't a primary tool of trafficing illegal content? >It seems like you are simply stating that the other side’s priorities are wrong. This is a juvenile at…
Are they not? This is just an assumption you have made. It doesn’t matter what I think about it
I asked:
> Do you believe that sexual predators sharing images with children on iPhones is a problem?
You haven’t answered.
>>It seems like you are simply stating that the other side’s priorities are wrong.
> This is a juvenile attempt at a nobility argument.
No it isn’t. It is an honest attempt to characterize your approach. It seems clear that you think the other sides priorities are wrong.
That’s fine. I have to assume everyone thinks that. The point is that it doesn’t matter that you think they are wrong. You have already lost. The things you don’t want are already happening.
My argument is that since that debate is lost, any attempt to restore privacy must accept that other people’s priorities are different. Simply trying to get the other side to change priorities when you are already losing doesn’t seem like a good approach.
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…
https://transparencyreport.google.com/youtube-policy/feature...
So the M1 has turned me off of Apple products because, quite frankly, I don't want to spend (more) of my time fixing shit a trillion dollar company broke and doesn't care to fix. This though, this will be the nail in the coffin with my 25 year relationship to Apple. I probably wouldn't even have batted an eye at it to be honest, iff, Apple hadn't been selling me on the idea that their platform is "private and secure.…
> So the M1 has turned me off of Apple products because, quite frankly, I don't want to spend (more) of my time fixing shit a trillion dollar company broke and doesn't care to fix. What is broken about the M1?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're being downvoted for eschewing website guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Oh yeah? Which one? I kind of doubt it because I've been censored for simply asking very straightforward questions with zero adjectives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Man. Sometimes English is an imprecise language. I guess the second quote I posted doesn't preclude scanning all photos. It would be a weird use of wording, but if all photos were scanned all the time, then technically that sentence would still be correct. I'm not 100% sure if this is about the on-device portion of this. Gmail and OneDrive already use this (and have for the better part of a decade) and I haven't seen…
The difference is choice. You choose to upload your photos where you know they might be scanned. Not uploading them is a choice to keep them private. This destroys the very notion of sovereignty over your own data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Apple CEO Tim Cook Slams Indiana’s ‘Religious Freedom’ Law" https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/apple-ce... The hypocrisy levels are vomit inducing...
What hipocrisy are you seeing?
Because IBM was also in 1939...Just the local laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See the GrapheneOS or CalyxOS websites for more details, they are significantly hardened for security compared to LineageOS. Currently those two projects only support Pixels, mainly because they're all bootloader unlockable. If these projects had as many volunteers as LOS then more devices could be officially supported. LOS on a supported Android phone is still a better option than a stock Android or iPhone at least.
My https://divestos.org project, while not as secure as GrapheneOS, provides lots of security to many older devices.