6 ms·

This quote sums it up perfectly : “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better t

This quote sums it up perfectly : “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep ,his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.” C.S. Lewis There are so many problems with this feature : - it can easily be used to identify also other types of dangerous material such as warnings against government activity or posters of organized protests - some malicious actor can send you this kind of content in order to get you in trouble - false positives - moral busy bodying (your employer not agreeing with you going drinking sunday night) Honestly, it feels like we're about to enter a new age of surveillance. Client-side surveillance.

gambiting 5y ago
The consequences seem very simple - once this system is in place, it's only a matter of time until a state actor, be it China or US or Russia or pretty much anywhere goes to Apple and says "hey this hash matching algorithm you have there? If you want to keep operating in our country, you need to match <those> hashes too, no, we won't tell you what they are and what they represent, but you have to report to our state agency who had those present on the device". Once the technology exists it will be abused.
- nyx-aiur 5y ago
  This is such a stupid fallacy and it comes up every time something like this is discussed. You don't know if anything is or will be abused you expect it because you expect your elected government to do so. The problem here is with you or your electors not with the technology itself. You want to fix the symptoms but not the problem. As usual.
  - gambiting 5y ago
    How so? The UK's snooper's charter that compels ISPs to save your entire browsing history for a year was only meant to be used to catch pedophiles and terrorists, and now 17 different agencies have been given completely warrantless access to the database, including the UK's Food Standards Agency(??!?!?!?). People have already been fired for abusing access too, so it definitely happens too. >>The problem here is with you or your electors not with the technology itself No offense, but this is such a shitty answer, and it's always made by apologists for these incredibly invasive technologies. Like, please explain to me, in simple terms, how can I, an immigrant who doesn't even have the ability to vote, vote to make an American corporation do nor not do something. I'm super curious.
    - nyx-aiur 5y ago
      It's the exact same shit I was talking about instead of fixing your governing body you want to fix it with technology. All the crypto apologist are the same way if the government YOU are electing does something stupid you want to fix the symptom and not the governing body. You are just throwing around goal posts instead of working on the real problem.
      - gambiting 5y ago
        >>if the government YOU are electing Except like I clearly said above, I'm an immigrant without the right to vote, so I'm not electing shit. Again, how exactly am I supposed to vote my way out of this?
        nyx-aiur 5y ago
        You can leave the country or you can be political active in other ways than direct votes. Don't wiggle your way out of your extremist position that you can't do anything except building technology which would be totally obsolete if you fixed your political problem.
        gambiting 5y ago
- bsenftner 5y ago
  This is what will happen, it's obvious to anyone not emotionally invested in the propaganda theater driving all social interaction.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Completely agree. I have absolutely no doubt this technology will be abused. I bet it will be used to silence dissent, opposition and wrongthink more often than to protect children.
  - candiodari 5y ago
    Why doesn't anyone ever question their intent to protect children? There is no such intent. When they do protect children, these are the sorts of observations of what happens when the state has 100% control over children: https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article238206754.html https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article23820... Why does the state, when they treat children like this, get to proceed on "more" child protection to protect children? Are we totally mad? Any effort to protect children is always a de facto effort to deliver more children into this system, and the state system is much worse than being abused in society (never mind that someone found there's actually more abuse in foster care than with abusive parents! Therefore even if you assume social services is always right ... they never protect kids against social services itself. Therefore you can reasonably assume that a kid that is getting abused will be forced into a worse situation by state "help")? I mean if you want to protect children, obviously the first step is to fix the child protection system that everybody knows is badly broken (you constantly hear stories about schools sabotaging research into abusive parents to protect the child against social services, covering for the child, lying about attendance or even wounds, ..., because they know social services will be much worse for the child). There's states where the corrections department provides better care (and definitely better educational instruction) for children than social services do. And yes: that is most definitely NOT because the corrections department provides quality instruction. It's just MUCH worse with social services. They cover themselves by showing the worst possible situations in society "demonstrating the need to intervene". And you won't hear them talk about how they treat children ... because frankly everyone knows. Reality is that research keeps finding the same thing: a child that gets abused at home ... is being treated better (gets a better future, better schools, better treatment, yes really, more to read, ...) than children "protected" from abuse by the state: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 (and that's ignoring that reasons for placement are almost never that the child is unsafe. The number 1 reason is non-cooperation with mental health and/or social care by either one of the parents or the child themselves. There is not even an allegation that the child is unsafe and needs protection. Proof is never provided, because for child protection there is no required standard of proof in law) And we're to believe that people who refuse to fix child services ... want extra power "to protect children"? How is this reasonable at all? They have proven they have no interest whatsoever in protecting children, as the cost cutting proves time and time again.
- sharken 5y ago
  And i think if you're working on these systems, then it's all too easy to only think about the happy scenario. But time has shown that an initial good concept will transform into something worse. We have a very recent example with Corona contact-tracing apps, that law enforcement in multiple democratic countries are now using for other purposes. So no, we should not allow this client-side scanning to go through, it will not end well.

gambiting 5y ago

The consequences seem very simple - once this system is in place, it's only a matter of time until a state actor, be it China or US or Russia or pretty much anywhere goes to Apple and says "hey this hash matching algorithm you have there? If you want to keep operating in our country, you need to match <those> hashes too, no, we won't tell you what they are and what they represent, but you have to report to our state agency who had those present on the device". Once the technology exists it will be abused.

nyx-aiur 5y ago
This is such a stupid fallacy and it comes up every time something like this is discussed. You don't know if anything is or will be abused you expect it because you expect your elected government to do so. The problem here is with you or your electors not with the technology itself. You want to fix the symptoms but not the problem. As usual.
- gambiting 5y ago
  How so? The UK's snooper's charter that compels ISPs to save your entire browsing history for a year was only meant to be used to catch pedophiles and terrorists, and now 17 different agencies have been given completely warrantless access to the database, including the UK's Food Standards Agency(??!?!?!?). People have already been fired for abusing access too, so it definitely happens too. >>The problem here is with you or your electors not with the technology itself No offense, but this is such a shitty answer, and it's always made by apologists for these incredibly invasive technologies. Like, please explain to me, in simple terms, how can I, an immigrant who doesn't even have the ability to vote, vote to make an American corporation do nor not do something. I'm super curious.
  - nyx-aiur 5y ago
    It's the exact same shit I was talking about instead of fixing your governing body you want to fix it with technology. All the crypto apologist are the same way if the government YOU are electing does something stupid you want to fix the symptom and not the governing body. You are just throwing around goal posts instead of working on the real problem.
    - gambiting 5y ago
      >>if the government YOU are electing Except like I clearly said above, I'm an immigrant without the right to vote, so I'm not electing shit. Again, how exactly am I supposed to vote my way out of this?
      - nyx-aiur 5y ago
        You can leave the country or you can be political active in other ways than direct votes. Don't wiggle your way out of your extremist position that you can't do anything except building technology which would be totally obsolete if you fixed your political problem.
        gambiting 5y ago
bsenftner 5y ago
This is what will happen, it's obvious to anyone not emotionally invested in the propaganda theater driving all social interaction.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Completely agree. I have absolutely no doubt this technology will be abused. I bet it will be used to silence dissent, opposition and wrongthink more often than to protect children.
- candiodari 5y ago
  Why doesn't anyone ever question their intent to protect children? There is no such intent. When they do protect children, these are the sorts of observations of what happens when the state has 100% control over children: https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article238206754.html https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article23820... Why does the state, when they treat children like this, get to proceed on "more" child protection to protect children? Are we totally mad? Any effort to protect children is always a de facto effort to deliver more children into this system, and the state system is much worse than being abused in society (never mind that someone found there's actually more abuse in foster care than with abusive parents! Therefore even if you assume social services is always right ... they never protect kids against social services itself. Therefore you can reasonably assume that a kid that is getting abused will be forced into a worse situation by state "help")? I mean if you want to protect children, obviously the first step is to fix the child protection system that everybody knows is badly broken (you constantly hear stories about schools sabotaging research into abusive parents to protect the child against social services, covering for the child, lying about attendance or even wounds, ..., because they know social services will be much worse for the child). There's states where the corrections department provides better care (and definitely better educational instruction) for children than social services do. And yes: that is most definitely NOT because the corrections department provides quality instruction. It's just MUCH worse with social services. They cover themselves by showing the worst possible situations in society "demonstrating the need to intervene". And you won't hear them talk about how they treat children ... because frankly everyone knows. Reality is that research keeps finding the same thing: a child that gets abused at home ... is being treated better (gets a better future, better schools, better treatment, yes really, more to read, ...) than children "protected" from abuse by the state: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 (and that's ignoring that reasons for placement are almost never that the child is unsafe. The number 1 reason is non-cooperation with mental health and/or social care by either one of the parents or the child themselves. There is not even an allegation that the child is unsafe and needs protection. Proof is never provided, because for child protection there is no required standard of proof in law) And we're to believe that people who refuse to fix child services ... want extra power "to protect children"? How is this reasonable at all? They have proven they have no interest whatsoever in protecting children, as the cost cutting proves time and time again.
sharken 5y ago
And i think if you're working on these systems, then it's all too easy to only think about the happy scenario. But time has shown that an initial good concept will transform into something worse. We have a very recent example with Corona contact-tracing apps, that law enforcement in multiple democratic countries are now using for other purposes. So no, we should not allow this client-side scanning to go through, it will not end well.