> To me, these numbers are significant. What would be insignificant? 1 child? 100? There are 73,000,000 children (under 18) in the US alone. 10,000 is .0001% o

> To me, these numbers are significant. What would be insignificant? 1 child? 100? There are 73,000,000 children (under 18) in the US alone. 10,000 is .0001% of that population. > Why don’t we let apple contribute where it thinks it can. Apple is the most profitable company in the world. It's a company that prides itself on its imagination and innovation, I wouldn't discount their ability to come up with something. > Maybe with apple that number goes down from 10,000 to 2,000. Wouldn’t that be a celebrated outcome? No, it's not. We make trade-offs all the time. The possible harm to Apple's user base is not worth the possibility that this reduces child abuse. There's a possibility these people move on to another platform and this does nothing. To get that number down Apple creates an entry point for violating the privacy of half a billion users worldwide. Many of them are in China, where pressure from the government has already moved Apple in directions that are harmful to its customers[1]. 1 - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...