7 ms·
I think there are a lot of great arguments to be made against this system, and the road that it is going down. But I think your arguments would be improved by
by stetrain 5y ago
I think there are a lot of great arguments to be made against this system, and the road that it is going down.
But I think your arguments would be improved by actually reading and understanding the current system Apple is proposing. Which, for example, does not include automatic reporting to authorities based only on a hash detection.
At the end of the day this is mostly an issue of political and legal requirements. Apple is doing what they think they need to do to cover their bases as they wrestle with governments over things like E2E encryption policies.
- Clubber 5y agoThink of it this way. Ever see the movie where they put the neck shackles on people that blow up if they do something wrong? Running Man is an example. With local device scanning, I feel apple is putting a neck bomb on me, but promising they won't blow it up unless I do so and so. I can't take the neck bomb off and never should have let them put it on in the first place. My head is now at the mercy of Apple now and forever because it's locked on. Now Apple can change the terms of service, boom. Apple has a bug, boom. Why in the hell would I want this neck bomb on me?!
- stetrain 5y agoSure. I'm not saying this is good. I'm saying there are a lot of kneejerk arguments being made that directly conflict with Apple's description of the system.
- postoak 5y agoThe problem is that you have to trust their description when the technology is a black box. And trust that it won't change in the future.
- stetrain 5y agoSure. But like I said the causes are mostly political and legal. A utopia of GPL-only mobile devices with no proprietary cloud service connections doesn't seem like a valid option. At least not for a large enough share of users to make a societal difference.