An Open Letter Against Apple's Privacy-Invasive Content Scanning Technology

No, what I gather is that many people cannot change their minds when presented with good evidence. Here's one: They complain about "monocultures" as if they're always bad but when I point out that the Linux kernel created a monoculture and the world hasn't imploded, they have no come-back. So they do the only thing that they can do.

It's fine with me, I wear it as a badge of pride because I know I'm right whenever that happens.

And what I'm saying is that this is a giant waste of time because if someone has a phobia about their kid getting abducted, that phobia will not go away just because Apple started scanning photos.

You want people to come up with a technical solution, but you don't even know to define what a "solution" is. How will we measure that solution absent statistics? How will we know if it's working or not? Okay, Apple starts scanning photos. Are we done? Has that solved the problem?

We don't know if that's enough, because people's fears here aren't based on the real world, they're based on Hollywood abduction movies, and those movies are still going to get made after Apple starts scanning photos.

You are completely correct that the stats are insufficient to convince these people. But you're also completely wrong in assuming that there is some kind of escape hatch or technological miracle that anyone can pull off to make those fears go away, because in your own words: "parents will be afraid for their children regardless of the stats."

If Apple's policy reduces abuse by 90%, they'll still be afraid. If it reduces it by 10%, they'll still be afraid. There is no technological solution that will ease their fear, because it's not about the stats.

----

I'm open to being proven wrong that predation is a serious problem that needs drastic intervention. I'm open to evidence that suggests that encryption is a big enough problem that we need to come up with a technological solution. I just want to see some actual evidence. People being scared of things is not evidence, that's not something we can have a productive conversation about.

If we're going to create a "solution", then we need to know what the problem is, what the weak points are, and what metrics we're using to figure out whether or not we're making progress.

If that's not on the table, then also in your words, we need to "accept that this is the environment" and stop trying to pretend that coming up with technical solutions will do anything to reduce calls to weaken encryption or insert back doors.

That is a very accurate representation of how I feel about this, too. I enjoy building apps, but I don't know that I can keep using these devices.

I was looking forward to upgrading to the new hardware in the fall, but now I'm not sure I can stomach the implications of buying a new device that may at any point start policing what I do far beyond what I'd accepted at the time of purchase.

Statistics are a reflection of reality. When you say that the stats don't matter, you are saying that the reality doesn't matter. Just that people are scared.

You need to go another step further than you are currently going, and realize that any technological "solution" will only be affecting the reality, and by extension will only be affecting the stats. And we both agree that the stats can't solve the problem.

It's not that making this about the stats will solve the problem. It won't. But neither will any technological change. You can not solve an irrational fear by making reality safer.

----

Let's say we abandon this fight and roll over and accept Apple moving forward with scanning. Do you honestly believe that even one parent is going to look at that and say, "okay, that's enough, I'm not scared of child predators anymore."? Can you truthfully tell me that you think the political landscape and the hostility towards encryption would change at all?

And if not, how can you float compromise as a political solution? What does a "solution" to an irrational fear even look like? How will we tell that the solution is working?

You say the stats don't matter; then we might as well give concerned parents fake "magic" bracelets and tell them that they make kids impossible to kidnap. Placebo bracelets won't reduce actual child abuse of course, but as you keep reiterating, actual child abuse numbers are not why these people are afraid. Heck, placebo bracelets might help reduce parent's fear more than Apple's system, since placebo bracelets would be a constantly visible reminder to the parents that they don't need to be afraid, and all of Apple's scanning happens invisibly behind the scenes where it's easy to forget.

----

> I want solutions to problems like the child abuse use cases, such that when calls to weaken encryption or insert back doors are made as they always will be, we don’t have to.

Out of curiosity, how will you prove to these people that your solutions are sufficient and that they work as substitutes for weakening encryption? How will you prove to these people that your solutions are enough?

Will you use stats? Appeal to logic?

You almost completely understand the entire situation right now, you just haven't connected the dots that all of your technological "solutions" are subject to the same problems as the current debate.