Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

piotr.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 595 posts

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#541

Post by solarkraft »

ekianjo wrote: post #524
gorgoiler wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can indeed tell how tired and old the complaint is by the nature of what it complains about. In 2021 we are instead lumbered with inconsistent support for hidpi displays, lack of DTMF in linphone, and Evolution’s option to disable pc beep on new message being a plugin . But that was just the last week. Next week will be better and the fight for freedom is indeed an eternal struggle.

> In 2021 we are instead lumbered with inconsistent support for hidpi displays, lack of DTMF in linphone, and Evolution’s option to disable pc beep on new message being a plugin. Those are not related complaints at all. Shifting goalposts much?

I read it as things getting better, problems becoming more minor.

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#542

Post by hsn915 »

simondotau wrote: post #535
hsn915 wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if they decide next year to use AI to automatically detect potential violating images? I hope you won't throw the "slippery slope is a fallacy" fallacy at me.

Slippery slope isn't always a fallacy, but it is the way most people use it. Most people just define the slope however they want to suit their argument. Let me Does this change to the software code represent a slippery slope of motive or opportunity? Many here have said yes, but in my opinion, no. When software can update itself, every single update is an opportunity for the software to betray you. That risk is alrea…

The reason that "slippery slope" is almost never a fallacy is that people with intentions to perform actions that are outside the overton window[0] of acceptable behavior will first do a thing that lies just on the edge of the overton window.

It is currently considered completely unacceptable for companies to scan the data on the user's own disk.

If someone wanted to start doing that, they would have to create a plausible and convincing excuse.

Once people accept that excuse and time passes, they can slowly "expand" the territory of this excuse (push the overton window further).

"Protecting the children" is exactly this kind of plausible and convincing excuse.

It needs not be the case that Apple specifically wants to scan user data so they came up with this excuse.

It's simply that, once scanning users data "for the good of humanity" becomes acceptable, _some_ malicious actor will push the overton window further and further.

Imagine in 10 years from now, all operating systems will scan users data to detect potential child porn material. It might even become required by law, or just by "social pressure". Just like it is now almost required by "social pressure" that social media platforms censor discourse and information.

It's then very easy to expand this capability to also detect illegally downloaded music, or adult videos, or whatever deemed unacceptable.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#543

Post by simondotau »

hsn915 wrote: post #542
simondotau wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slippery slope isn't always a fallacy, but it is the way most people use it. Most people just define the slope however they want to suit their argument. Let me Does this change to the software code represent a slippery slope of motive or opportunity? Many here have said yes, but in my opinion, no. When software can update itself, every single update is an opportunity for the software to betray you. That risk is alrea…

The reason that "slippery slope" is almost never a fallacy is that people with intentions to perform actions that are outside the overton window[0] of acceptable behavior will first do a thing that lies just on the edge of the overton window. It is currently considered completely unacceptable for companies to scan the data on the user's own disk. If someone wanted to start doing that, they would have to create a plau…

https://twitter.com/simondotau/status/1415564718375272455

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#544

Post by pjmlp »

ekianjo wrote: post #444

> The worst part is: how do I put my money where my mouth is? Am I going back to using Linux on the desktop (2022 will be the year of Linux on the desktop, remember), debugging wifi drivers and tirelessly trying to make resume-from-suspend work? Oh come on. DOn't make it sound like it's that bad. Wifi is a solved problem for a long time now, and you can buy Lenovo, System76 or Tuxedo if you want to make sure 100% thi…

My 1215B Asus Netbook with Ubuntu doesn't share that opinion.

It is basically the surviving device I still bother to run GNU/Linux bare metal on, and it was sold with Linux support from the get go, yet....

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#545

Post by simondotau »

hsn915 wrote: post #542
simondotau wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slippery slope isn't always a fallacy, but it is the way most people use it. Most people just define the slope however they want to suit their argument. Let me Does this change to the software code represent a slippery slope of motive or opportunity? Many here have said yes, but in my opinion, no. When software can update itself, every single update is an opportunity for the software to betray you. That risk is alrea…

The reason that "slippery slope" is almost never a fallacy is that people with intentions to perform actions that are outside the overton window[0] of acceptable behavior will first do a thing that lies just on the edge of the overton window. It is currently considered completely unacceptable for companies to scan the data on the user's own disk. If someone wanted to start doing that, they would have to create a plau…

I don't agree that what Apple is doing is sufficiently distinct from what Google has already been doing to represent an Overton window shift. To most people, they will see that the corpus of images being targeted is functionally identical to what Google has been doing for Android users for many years and therefore the difference is mere implementation detail. A distinction without a difference. Nothing more.

Highly technical, libertarian-minded people see a big distinction between on-device and off-device scanning. But such people have always eschewed the "managed experience" model of Apple devices.

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#546

Post by pjmlp »

danhor wrote: post #498
FourthProtocol wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah... when you have a home-built PC with *nix unsupported hardware and invested lots of $$ you're still looking for a hard time. First, there's the hardware cost. I'm not throwing my Surface out, and I'm not throwing out my perfectly working desktop components either. But that aside... Every time I read how the great unwashed should just contribute fixes already to benefit everyone, I despair. I write code. I build…

For Linux there is supported hardware from Vendors like system76 or similar. You don't expect to run Windows on Chromebooks, Android Smartphones or M1 Macbooks without issues, because these vendors only optimize & test for linux. But since linux is such an open platform, you have a large grey area "vendor didn't test it, ymmv". It may work fine, but you never know if the vendor decided to e.g. ignore standards for re…

That was why I bought an Asus 1215B Netbook with GNU/Linux support out of the box, an Ubuntu distrubution actually.

First the wlan stopped working, because Canonical decided to replace the proprietary driver wih the open source one, however since it was still work in progress, dozen of us had to suck it up with LAN until the open source driver got feature parity.

Then my GPGPU experience got degraded from OpenGL 4.1/hardware video decoding to OpenGL 3.3 with the replacement of the AMD driver (fxgr) with the open source radeon one.

So in the end, it doesn't matter that much buying supposedly supported hardware.

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#547

Post by fsflover »

zepto wrote: post #166
FabHK wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It all depends on what perceptual hashes you use. If Apple can institute a process whereby those are tied to the OS version, but not to the region, then it would be impossible to impose jurisdiction-specific exceptions.

> It all depends on what perceptual hashes you use. I’m talking about the mechanism as described, not a hypothetical. > If Apple can institute a process whereby those are tied to the OS version, but not to the region, then it would be impossible to impose jurisdiction-specific exceptions. As it is the mechanism they have built only works in the US jurisdiction.

> As it is the mechanism they have built only works in the US jurisdiction.

How do you know? I think it's just implemented in the US. Nothing stops Apple to implement it elsewhere.

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#548

Post by Spooky23 »

mattigames wrote: post #54
Spooky23 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where’s your evidence on this? The NCMEC database and this hashing have been around for like 15 years. I’m curious as to how you know this.

False positives have been found, not because the photo hold any similarities but because the hashes match: https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/929-On...

Ok. Who has been arrested for a picture of a tomato that generated a hash collision?

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#549

Post by skinkestek »

simondotau wrote: post #538
skinkestek wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Furthermore - and the extent of this was eye opening to me and I'm not the most naive person: What for parents is "children playing in the pool in the garden - shared on YouTube so grandparents could see it" - is something that is collected into playlists and shared with "interesting" timestamps in certain circles. A story here on HN a couple of years ago about a (for us normal people) totally innocent video having r…

I agree that "children playing in the pool in the garden" can function as CP when viewed by a sick bastard. But just because material can function as CP doesn't turn it into CSAM. It would never be classified under any of the formal CSAM categories (A1, A2, B1, B2) unless the video included lascivious exhibition, e.g. focus on genitals, sexual touching or posing, or an aroused adult. The definitions are horrifyingly,…

OK, thanks for the update.

I think we more or less agree.

Re: The deceptive PR behind Apple’s “expanded protections for children”

#550

Post by phkahler »

daveidol wrote: post #113
phkahler wrote: post #108

I really don't get all the hype. This is not a backdoor as it's called in TFA. It's not Apple "reaching into your device". It is literally checking for specific images and reporting their presence to Apply if found. It's not using AI to analyze your photos or anything like that. It's looking for specific images, and only prior to uploading them to iCloud. It won't even flag your own nasty images because the hash won'…

Wait are you saying you get ads based on things you converse about out loud in the real world because your phone is listening to everything in your pocket? You know that is a myth and isn't true, right?

>> Wait are you saying you get ads based on things you converse about out loud in the real world because your phone is listening to everything in your pocket?

YES.

>> You know that is a myth and isn't true, right?

No, it's not. I guarantee it. I don't know if it's built-in phone software or if it's the FB app listening while idle, or something else. Alexa seemed to be doing this too, so that's put away in a box somewhere.

Here's another story. I got an Oculus Quest 2 and had told a co-worker about it and one of the games I play. He was on the fence, so I brought it in and let him try some of the intro/demo apps on it. Having been convinced that this particular implementation of VR was finally good, he decided to order one from Best Buy to pick up after work. He got out his phone and (not sure what app he looked at, probably browser) the first thing that came up was an ad for the Oculus Quest 2.

These are not coincidences - particularly the one I mentioned a few comments up. That's not a topic in our house, but the next day there were the ads.

Post reply on HN