3 ms·
> You already operate under this trust model. Do I? Can you elaborate? Do you notice a difference between a company (potentially) doing this behind closed door
by 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago
> You already operate under this trust model.
Do I? Can you elaborate? Do you notice a difference between a company (potentially) doing this behind closed doors and as quietly as possible and doing this in a public official way?
What if I tell you I don't use any of the operating systems you listed? Does your answer change?
I have a question: Would you welcome such a move? Do you believe that taking things a bit further would be nice because "we might catch a few criminals"?
- threeseed 5y agoIf you are not compiling your operating system, every library and every application from scratch then you are blindly trusting third parties. And if you are assuming Apple can't be trusted when they say they won't expand this to non-CSAM use cases then not sure why you would then trust Microsoft, Ubuntu etc.
- 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago> If you are not compiling your operating system, every library and every application from scratch then you are blindly trusting third parties. This implies that trust is always the same and that if you trust one entity (because you did not event limit your answer to corporations) you are supposed to trust everyone and if that is not the case then you have some kind of logical error in your thinking. It also implies that losing the trust in one entity, but not some other, doesn't make sense somehow.
- simondotau 5y agoThat makes sense—so long as you lose trust in the entity when they actually betray that trust.