3 ms·

here is a quote from EFF complaint about Apple alerting parents to kids under 13 being sent porn: "The recipient’s parents will be informed of the content with

here is a quote from EFF complaint about Apple alerting parents to kids under 13 being sent porn: "The recipient’s parents will be informed of the content without the sender consenting to their involvement." Are parents really outraged by this? Are people sending porn upset about this? My own view is as a parent if you send porn to my kids, I shouldn't NEED your consent to be alerted to this. I paid for the device, so it should do what I want, and if I turn this feature on than it should alert me.

shuckles 5y ago
For ideological consistency, I can only hope the EFF has a lecture prepared about two party consent for kids who show their phones to their parents if they receive a dick pic.
- slownews45 5y ago
  I think they are coming at this from the view that because iMessage was one of the first actual E2E encrypted products, showing the pic to the parent (after picture has reached end user device and been decrypted and is ready to display) should require consent. Ie, the encryption has been "broken". That said - I don't find it very compelling. Parent paid for device. Parent is responsible for child. Parent should be allowed to control device (including setting a kids account instead of adult which trigger this etc). So I want to preserve MY right to both the device and to take care of my child. EFF seems to be focusing oddly on the rights of someone who DIDN'T pay for device.
  - shuckles 5y ago
    The picture is not sent to the parent. They are notified that the child viewed a sensitive photograph, after warning the child, and the parent can view the photograph on the child’s device.
    - slownews45 5y ago
      Right, but sender just wanted to send the photo to the kid, and now apple is providing a path for parent to see the picture. Listen - I don't get the EFF argument any more than you do.
      - shuckles 5y ago
        I think we’re on the same page and just wanted to provide more detail about how far-fetched their argument seems when you examine the details of what was built.

shuckles 5y ago

For ideological consistency, I can only hope the EFF has a lecture prepared about two party consent for kids who show their phones to their parents if they receive a dick pic.

slownews45 5y ago
I think they are coming at this from the view that because iMessage was one of the first actual E2E encrypted products, showing the pic to the parent (after picture has reached end user device and been decrypted and is ready to display) should require consent. Ie, the encryption has been "broken". That said - I don't find it very compelling. Parent paid for device. Parent is responsible for child. Parent should be allowed to control device (including setting a kids account instead of adult which trigger this etc). So I want to preserve MY right to both the device and to take care of my child. EFF seems to be focusing oddly on the rights of someone who DIDN'T pay for device.
- shuckles 5y ago
  The picture is not sent to the parent. They are notified that the child viewed a sensitive photograph, after warning the child, and the parent can view the photograph on the child’s device.
  - slownews45 5y ago
    Right, but sender just wanted to send the photo to the kid, and now apple is providing a path for parent to see the picture. Listen - I don't get the EFF argument any more than you do.
    - shuckles 5y ago
      I think we’re on the same page and just wanted to provide more detail about how far-fetched their argument seems when you examine the details of what was built.