3 ms·
This is the part that also caught my eye. Surely Apple's lawyers have also reviewed the same law, and if it's that clearly defined, how did they justify/explai
by sbarre 5y ago
This is the part that also caught my eye.
Surely Apple's lawyers have also reviewed the same law, and if it's that clearly defined, how did they justify/explain their approach?
- tdonovic 5y agoBecause Apple (its employees) aren't actually viewing the images, nor transmitting them. They mention somewhere that it's a low res proxy of the image, or something similar.
- heavyset_go 5y ago> They mention somewhere that it's a low res proxy of the image, or something similar. Perceptual hashes are just integer/byte encodings of images that were scaled down and had some transformations applied to them. If you convert a hash into an array of pixels and reverse the transformations, you'll get some of the original image that was scaled down and hashed.
- xucheng 5y agoAnd if you then apply DLSS, you may even get the original image.
- rdedev 5y agoBut wouldn't a low res image of CP be still classified as CP ? I guess the manual verification will ve done as a joint venture by apple and the authorities
- sbarre 5y ago> I guess the manual verification will ve done as a joint venture by apple and the authorities Do we know this for sure? And even if it is, this is still apparently illegal under current law.