4 ms·

It’s not just you. I have pictures of my kids playing in the bath. No genitals are in shot and it’s just kids innocently playing with bubbles. The photos aren’t

It’s not just you. I have pictures of my kids playing in the bath. No genitals are in shot and it’s just kids innocently playing with bubbles. The photos aren’t even shared but they’d still get scanned by this tool. This kind of thing isn’t even unusual either. I know my parents have pictures of myself and my siblings playing in the bath (obviously taken on film rather than digital photography) and I know friends have pictures of their kids too. While the difference between innocent images and something explicit easy for a human to identify, I’m not sure I’d trust AI to understand that nuance.

Closi 5y ago
> While the difference between innocent images and something explicit easy for a human to identify, I’m not sure I’d trust AI to understand that nuance. In this case it’s not AI that’s understanding the nuance, it’s authorities that identify the exact pictures they want to track and then this tool lets them identify what phones/accounts have that photo (or presumably took it). If ‘AI’ is used here it is to detect if one photo contains all/part of another photo, rather than to determine if the photo is abusive or not. Although there is a legitimate slippery slope argument to be had here.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Is there some way of verifying that the fingerprints in this database will never match sensitive documents on their way from a whistleblower to journalists, or anything else that isn't strictly illegal? How will this tech be repurposed over time once it's in place?
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    You seem to be suggesting that the AI will go directly from scanning your photos for incriminating fingerprints to reporting you to journalists. I have to assume humans are involved at some point before journalists are notified. The false-positive will be cleared up and no reputations sullied (except perhaps the reputation of using AI to scan for digital fingerprints).
    - nitrogen 5y ago
      The other way around. If the database of fingerprints is unauditable, and especially if the database varies from country to country, then it would be very easy to add fingerprints for classified documents, or photos documenting known war crimes, or even just copyrighted stuff to close the so-called analog hole. Documents could also be engineered to trigger false positives, making it difficult or impossible for a corporate whistleblower to photograph incriminating evidence to deliver to the authorities. So, if the rumors are true and every iPhone will check every photo against an opaque database of perceptual fingerprints, what safeguards exist (beyond "trust us" from the database keepers) to prevent abuse of the feature to suppress evidence and control the flow of information, and which organizations or governments will have control over the contents of the database? As always, who watches the watchers?
    - therealjumbo 5y ago
      >The false-positive will be cleared up and no reputations sullied... This is dangerously naive. The US justice system alone will hound people on goosed up charges and try to get people to accept a plea deal and write a bogus confession. Parallel construction. Additionally if you can't audit the database (I'd bet very few people can, including your senator) how do you know a hash of something not CP wasn't inserted into the database. This entire system screams ready for govt overreach. It's worse than normal since there'll be no public evidence when it's abused.
toxik 5y ago
> No genitals are in shot That you even have to consider sexual interpretations of your BABY'S GENITALS is an affront to me. I have pictures of my baby completely naked, because it is, and I stress this, A BABY. They play naked all the time, it's completely normal.
- feanaro 5y ago
  Indeed, I'm guessing this must be some cultural shift that was successfully implanted in some cultures because I too find the idea completely bonkers.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    If babies playing naked are now child pornography, most Europeans above 50 should be jailed. As that seems unlikely, I guess CSAM just uses a constantly updated database of known hashes for matching.
    - suizi 5y ago
      It doesn't mean they can't look at the matches without jailing you (still a violation of privacy).
- laumars 5y ago
  Yeah that’s a fair point. The only reason I was careful was just in case those photos got leaked and taken out of context. Which is a bloody depressing thing to consider when innocently taking pictures of your own family :(
  - toxik 5y ago
    I might have phrased that ambiguously, I mean "an affront to me" as in "to me, that's an affront", not that you have somehow insulted me. I say let children be free, no court is going to indict you because you have baby pictures on your phone.
ajdude 5y ago
> While the difference between innocent images and something explicit easy for a human to identify, I’m not sure I’d trust AI to understand that nuance. I recall a story several years ago where someone was getting the film developed at a local drugstore, and the employee reported them for CP because of bath photos. This was definitely a thing before computers with normal every day humans.

Closi 5y ago

> While the difference between innocent images and something explicit easy for a human to identify, I’m not sure I’d trust AI to understand that nuance. In this case it’s not AI that’s understanding the nuance, it’s authorities that identify the exact pictures they want to track and then this tool lets them identify what phones/accounts have that photo (or presumably took it). If ‘AI’ is used here it is to detect if one photo contains all/part of another photo, rather than to determine if the photo is abusive or not. Although there is a legitimate slippery slope argument to be had here.

nitrogen 5y ago
Is there some way of verifying that the fingerprints in this database will never match sensitive documents on their way from a whistleblower to journalists, or anything else that isn't strictly illegal? How will this tech be repurposed over time once it's in place?
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  You seem to be suggesting that the AI will go directly from scanning your photos for incriminating fingerprints to reporting you to journalists. I have to assume humans are involved at some point before journalists are notified. The false-positive will be cleared up and no reputations sullied (except perhaps the reputation of using AI to scan for digital fingerprints).
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    The other way around. If the database of fingerprints is unauditable, and especially if the database varies from country to country, then it would be very easy to add fingerprints for classified documents, or photos documenting known war crimes, or even just copyrighted stuff to close the so-called analog hole. Documents could also be engineered to trigger false positives, making it difficult or impossible for a corporate whistleblower to photograph incriminating evidence to deliver to the authorities. So, if the rumors are true and every iPhone will check every photo against an opaque database of perceptual fingerprints, what safeguards exist (beyond "trust us" from the database keepers) to prevent abuse of the feature to suppress evidence and control the flow of information, and which organizations or governments will have control over the contents of the database? As always, who watches the watchers?
  - therealjumbo 5y ago
    >The false-positive will be cleared up and no reputations sullied... This is dangerously naive. The US justice system alone will hound people on goosed up charges and try to get people to accept a plea deal and write a bogus confession. Parallel construction. Additionally if you can't audit the database (I'd bet very few people can, including your senator) how do you know a hash of something not CP wasn't inserted into the database. This entire system screams ready for govt overreach. It's worse than normal since there'll be no public evidence when it's abused.

toxik 5y ago

> No genitals are in shot That you even have to consider sexual interpretations of your BABY'S GENITALS is an affront to me. I have pictures of my baby completely naked, because it is, and I stress this, A BABY. They play naked all the time, it's completely normal.

feanaro 5y ago
Indeed, I'm guessing this must be some cultural shift that was successfully implanted in some cultures because I too find the idea completely bonkers.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  If babies playing naked are now child pornography, most Europeans above 50 should be jailed. As that seems unlikely, I guess CSAM just uses a constantly updated database of known hashes for matching.
  - suizi 5y ago
    It doesn't mean they can't look at the matches without jailing you (still a violation of privacy).
laumars 5y ago
Yeah that’s a fair point. The only reason I was careful was just in case those photos got leaked and taken out of context. Which is a bloody depressing thing to consider when innocently taking pictures of your own family :(
- toxik 5y ago
  I might have phrased that ambiguously, I mean "an affront to me" as in "to me, that's an affront", not that you have somehow insulted me. I say let children be free, no court is going to indict you because you have baby pictures on your phone.

ajdude 5y ago

> While the difference between innocent images and something explicit easy for a human to identify, I’m not sure I’d trust AI to understand that nuance. I recall a story several years ago where someone was getting the film developed at a local drugstore, and the employee reported them for CP because of bath photos. This was definitely a thing before computers with normal every day humans.