3 ms·

I'll assume you are explaining the concept, but at this point the sum of all the elements sums up to a feature that should be cancelled. The arguments have bee

I'll assume you are explaining the concept, but at this point the sum of all the elements sums up to a feature that should be cancelled. The arguments have been stated before, the principal one being that scanning the users device goes against the wish of users and what Apple until now has stood for. I think Apple fails to see the seriousness of this.

nicce 5y ago
The sad truth is, that we won't see more E2EE features by Apple without this. It is hard decision for hard problem. And the problem gets bigger when you are the most valuable company in the world.
- sharken 5y ago
  Yes that could very well be the dilemma Apple is in. But i don't consider it E2EE if you are scanning content on the device first.
colinmhayes 5y ago
> and what Apple until now has stood for. Apple has a billboard right outside my office. Up until last week it said "privacy" in big letters. Now there's no mention of privacy at all.
zepto 5y ago
> the sum of all the elements The comment chain I was responding to is about the claim that neuralhash is broken so the system is dangerous. This claim has been repeated multiple times in this forum. Indeed it is one of the loudest two arguments against the system and is simply false. The sum of elements which are false is still false now matter how many you have. It’s certainly not universally true that scanning the device goes against the wish of the users. There are many users who are quite happy to have their devices scanned if it is part of making life harder for child abusers. I have spoken to such people. Therein lies the problem. This system really doesn’t do anything harmful, and it really does just make the tool less useful for collecting child pornography. There is no simple argument against it, hence all of the misrepresentations about its purported technical problems. I strongly dislike the feature, and would rather they don’t do it. My arguments are that I don’t want to be, even in principle, suspected of something I haven’t done. And that trust should be mutual. If Apple wants me to trust them, I want them to trust me. I don’t see how we help make the world better by using false narratives about technical issues to get what we want.

nicce 5y ago

The sad truth is, that we won't see more E2EE features by Apple without this. It is hard decision for hard problem. And the problem gets bigger when you are the most valuable company in the world.

sharken 5y ago
Yes that could very well be the dilemma Apple is in. But i don't consider it E2EE if you are scanning content on the device first.

colinmhayes 5y ago

> and what Apple until now has stood for. Apple has a billboard right outside my office. Up until last week it said "privacy" in big letters. Now there's no mention of privacy at all.

zepto 5y ago

> the sum of all the elements The comment chain I was responding to is about the claim that neuralhash is broken so the system is dangerous. This claim has been repeated multiple times in this forum. Indeed it is one of the loudest two arguments against the system and is simply false. The sum of elements which are false is still false now matter how many you have. It’s certainly not universally true that scanning the device goes against the wish of the users. There are many users who are quite happy to have their devices scanned if it is part of making life harder for child abusers. I have spoken to such people. Therein lies the problem. This system really doesn’t do anything harmful, and it really does just make the tool less useful for collecting child pornography. There is no simple argument against it, hence all of the misrepresentations about its purported technical problems. I strongly dislike the feature, and would rather they don’t do it. My arguments are that I don’t want to be, even in principle, suspected of something I haven’t done. And that trust should be mutual. If Apple wants me to trust them, I want them to trust me. I don’t see how we help make the world better by using false narratives about technical issues to get what we want.