3 ms·

If you actually think there is going to be a fully automated system dispatching police SWAT teams throughout the US without a manual (or judicial) review then..

by mthoms 5y ago

If you actually think there is going to be a fully automated system dispatching police SWAT teams throughout the US without a manual (or judicial) review then.... I really don't know what to tell you.

mikewarot 5y ago
It'll all be shadow-ban type stuff, your account will be turned off, without appeal, things of that nature.
- mthoms 5y ago
  That's a different thread of comments. This one is about automated dispatching of SWAT teams.
sithlord 5y ago
Guess its hard to believe that their is a world outside of the United States. Already do whatever it takes to pin some BS on someone that opposes them and has them executed. This would be no different.
- mthoms 5y ago
  I don’t understand. If the government can just claim you had CP without proof, then they can just… do that? They don’t need Apples system. Especially since anything flagged by this system is manually reviewed by Apple. So, there would exist counter-evidence for the govt claim. Don’t misunderstand, I see how this system is ripe for abuse. I was just commenting on the specific claim that there will be automated SWAT call outs (presumably in the US).
  - smorgusofborg 5y ago
    It should be extremely easy for any group that has access to tools like NSO Group's to use the information on a device to convincingly add data to devices. What is generally missing is the question of why certain people's devices were selectively searched. Attacks by the west on journalists often rely on the excuse of border searches for example.
  - himinlomax 5y ago
    > If the government can just claim you had CP without proof, then they can just… do that? The problem is that they can do whatever if you have CP. Emphasis on "have": you might not even know you have it, because all it takes for you to be guilty is for a forbidden bit of data to be on your disk or cloud account. How did it end there? Doesn't matter much. It's unlikely you'll be convicted if someone else maliciously puts CP on your drive, but it's extremely likely your whole neighborhood will know about it before it's settled. Think about that. > They don’t need Apples system. Apple's system makes it sure that whenever someone puts CP on someone else's account, it rings the police and starts the nightmare. Without it, there's a few extra steps that make the nightmare much less likely to happen in the first place.
    - mthoms 5y ago
      This is plausible and exactly why I oppose this system. The only argument I made was against the claim that fully automated police dispatches will occur because of this system (in the west). Making outrageous, tinfoil hat level claims does not help our collective argument against this system. It just makes us look like paranoid conspiracy theorists. Let’s make coherent arguments (like the one you made above) instead of fantasy ones.
jandrese 5y ago
Yeah, it normally requires an anonymous phone call from a VoIP number.
- LMYahooTFY 5y ago
  Is this an allusion to an actual occurrence?
  - macintux 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting
himinlomax 5y ago
A dodgy phone call from an unknown number abroad by a stupid teenager is enough to get a SWAT team to murder innocent civilians, what makes you think they'll be smarter when the "call" comes from a robot? I mean, seriously, you're assuming as beyond obvious something that's demonstrably wrong RIGHT NOW.
- mthoms 5y ago
  Those prank SWAT calls are (a) from a human and (b) based on the assumption of IMMEDIATE risk of death/injury. Furthermore, (c) the CP scanning implementation itself requires human review. So no, under the proposed implementation (and current judicial requirements in the west) robots dispatching armed police to kill pets or people without ANY human oversight because of a situation that is not time sensitive is mere fantasy. Don’t misunderstand, I am against this whole thing for the reasons many others have well articulated in this thread. But the claim that robots are dispatching armed police without any human interference RIGHT NOW is provably wrong. Show me one incident where this has happened already and I will donate $100 to the charity of your choice. And yes, the judicial rules and Apples implementation could change in the future. That’s certainly a risk but is not the case RIGHT NOW. I mean, seriously?

by mthoms 5y ago

mikewarot 5y ago

It'll all be shadow-ban type stuff, your account will be turned off, without appeal, things of that nature.

mthoms 5y ago
That's a different thread of comments. This one is about automated dispatching of SWAT teams.

sithlord 5y ago

Guess its hard to believe that their is a world outside of the United States. Already do whatever it takes to pin some BS on someone that opposes them and has them executed. This would be no different.

mthoms 5y ago
I don’t understand. If the government can just claim you had CP without proof, then they can just… do that? They don’t need Apples system. Especially since anything flagged by this system is manually reviewed by Apple. So, there would exist counter-evidence for the govt claim. Don’t misunderstand, I see how this system is ripe for abuse. I was just commenting on the specific claim that there will be automated SWAT call outs (presumably in the US).
- smorgusofborg 5y ago
  It should be extremely easy for any group that has access to tools like NSO Group's to use the information on a device to convincingly add data to devices. What is generally missing is the question of why certain people's devices were selectively searched. Attacks by the west on journalists often rely on the excuse of border searches for example.
- himinlomax 5y ago
  > If the government can just claim you had CP without proof, then they can just… do that? The problem is that they can do whatever if you have CP. Emphasis on "have": you might not even know you have it, because all it takes for you to be guilty is for a forbidden bit of data to be on your disk or cloud account. How did it end there? Doesn't matter much. It's unlikely you'll be convicted if someone else maliciously puts CP on your drive, but it's extremely likely your whole neighborhood will know about it before it's settled. Think about that. > They don’t need Apples system. Apple's system makes it sure that whenever someone puts CP on someone else's account, it rings the police and starts the nightmare. Without it, there's a few extra steps that make the nightmare much less likely to happen in the first place.
  - mthoms 5y ago
    This is plausible and exactly why I oppose this system. The only argument I made was against the claim that fully automated police dispatches will occur because of this system (in the west). Making outrageous, tinfoil hat level claims does not help our collective argument against this system. It just makes us look like paranoid conspiracy theorists. Let’s make coherent arguments (like the one you made above) instead of fantasy ones.

jandrese 5y ago

Yeah, it normally requires an anonymous phone call from a VoIP number.

LMYahooTFY 5y ago
Is this an allusion to an actual occurrence?
- macintux 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting

himinlomax 5y ago

A dodgy phone call from an unknown number abroad by a stupid teenager is enough to get a SWAT team to murder innocent civilians, what makes you think they'll be smarter when the "call" comes from a robot? I mean, seriously, you're assuming as beyond obvious something that's demonstrably wrong RIGHT NOW.

mthoms 5y ago
Those prank SWAT calls are (a) from a human and (b) based on the assumption of IMMEDIATE risk of death/injury. Furthermore, (c) the CP scanning implementation itself requires human review. So no, under the proposed implementation (and current judicial requirements in the west) robots dispatching armed police to kill pets or people without ANY human oversight because of a situation that is not time sensitive is mere fantasy. Don’t misunderstand, I am against this whole thing for the reasons many others have well articulated in this thread. But the claim that robots are dispatching armed police without any human interference RIGHT NOW is provably wrong. Show me one incident where this has happened already and I will donate $100 to the charity of your choice. And yes, the judicial rules and Apples implementation could change in the future. That’s certainly a risk but is not the case RIGHT NOW. I mean, seriously?