4 ms·
Unpopular opinion here. I see the slippery slope, but I would say that this is the bare minimum price Apple is willing to pay to enforce privacy and encryption
by camillomiller 5y ago
Unpopular opinion here.
I see the slippery slope, but I would say that this is the bare minimum price Apple is willing to pay to enforce privacy and encryption all over the ecosystem.
They needed to give something to the governments to take the “think of the children” element from the broader privacy discourse.
I think for example that the radical stance of Telegram on this is much more strategically detrimental to our broader right to privacy than this compromise Apple has settled with.
That said, we need full transparency here. Apple’s statement that the probability of false flagging is one in a trillion is not enough and can’t be taken at face value.
- cblconfederate 5y ago> needed to give something to the governments Why? do car companies feel also compelled to give your car's location to all the governments? There is no need for apple to do anything, it's a choice, they are doing tit-for-tat with governments. That's always nefarious
- bengale 5y agoI thought modern cars did this already?
- jbarrs 5y agoPerhaps not automatically, but many cars do save GPS data in their diagnostic data, which could easily be accessed if a case was brought against you.
- cblconfederate 5y agothey do?
- camillomiller 5y agoBecause this is the biggest capitalistic entity in history, and the only risk it faces is governmental actions. When it comes to governmental action against privacy, that means undermining encryption for everyone.
- cblconfederate 5y agoWhen apple does it you can do nothing as a user. You can however complain to your representative in a democratic society
- xiphias2 5y agoApple can’t even build a self driving car, which is an easier problem than building a neural network that can’t be tricked. If they write one in a trillion, they didn’t try hard enough to attack their own system. They should publish their model and get it peer reviewed publicly, without that their number is unscientific.
- camillomiller 5y agoAgreed 100%. That's what I mean by having more transparency.
- xiphias2 5y agoThe point the article is making is that there is no technical way to give up on full E2E with a backdoor that can't be misused. Both politicians and Tim Cook are fully aware of it.