3 ms·

> The risk she perceives with Apple is that they will falsely accuse people of crime. In my country, there was not so long ago a case of a person wrongly accus

> The risk she perceives with Apple is that they will falsely accuse people of crime. In my country, there was not so long ago a case of a person wrongly accused of murder[0]. He spent 18 years in prison, despite there being no convincing evidence of him committing the crime. The people invested in the case wanted to have a scapegoat ASAP. Cases related to pedophilia are often very emotionally-charged, given the nature of the crimes. It can easily lead to hastily made decisions that can ruin many lives. > Not to mention how infinitely unlikely it is that _several_ of your photos would be similar enough to known abusive material to be flagged. Given enough time and enough attempts, there still is a possibility of something like that occurring. And this is with an assumption that the algorithm used will be correctly implemented with no false positives at all – something that I doubt even a manual analysis by humans would be able to achieve given the volume of data to check. [0]: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprawa_Tomasza_Komendy https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprawa_Tomasza_Komendy (in Polish)

Grustaf 5y ago
My point was that the article has nothing to do with the Apple situation. Being confused for someone rightly accused of a crime is very different from being falsely accused. And I'm not sure what your main point is. Yes, sometimes people are wrongly accused, even convicted. Is that argument against having a legal system, or what are you trying to say?
- mkotowski 5y ago
  I am trying to say that over eagerness in searching for a crime where there is none could cause more damage than it is worth. Those committing the crimes would quickly switch to other methods, but those innocent would be caught by accident. I am also not saying that such people should be left free and unpunished, but that the method proposed could cause far more bad than good, in my humble opinion of course. A legal system of some kind is obviously necessary, but using argument of thinking about `insert a group of people you should care about` can easily lead to abuse of the established laws.

Grustaf 5y ago

My point was that the article has nothing to do with the Apple situation. Being confused for someone rightly accused of a crime is very different from being falsely accused. And I'm not sure what your main point is. Yes, sometimes people are wrongly accused, even convicted. Is that argument against having a legal system, or what are you trying to say?

mkotowski 5y ago
I am trying to say that over eagerness in searching for a crime where there is none could cause more damage than it is worth. Those committing the crimes would quickly switch to other methods, but those innocent would be caught by accident. I am also not saying that such people should be left free and unpunished, but that the method proposed could cause far more bad than good, in my humble opinion of course. A legal system of some kind is obviously necessary, but using argument of thinking about `insert a group of people you should care about` can easily lead to abuse of the established laws.