2 ms·

>Recognition isn't something people would always be able to immediately do with CSAM imagery so Apple, which has already created a tool to recognize it, can ass

by slg 5y ago

>Recognition isn't something people would always be able to immediately do with CSAM imagery so Apple, which has already created a tool to recognize it, can assist with that. You said you didn't want Apple to be the police but you know want them to be the judge of what is and isn't CSAM? >It can also create tools to reduce the overhead of reporting. If you make it easier to report, more people will do it. You're assuming that anyone that ever encounters CSAM would go out of their way to report it, which simply isn't true. I don't know why you are assuming that potential reporters knowing about CSAM but not reporting it is anywhere close to as common as CSAM being unknown and therefore obviously unreported. >My right to privacy is not an infringement of your rights so this argument has no bearing in reality. Law enforcement requires probable cause to get permission to surveil the population and there's been countless cases thrown out because of this violation, which, as it turns out, was even tested in the context of technology interfacing with NCMEC. As the other reply stated, certain content does infringe on other people's rights. Also Apple isn't law enforcement. They don't need probable cause. One of the primary and unmentioned motivators here is that they don't want CSAM ending up on their servers and opening themselves up to legal action. >Those people are also pushing the same false dichotomy that you are. There is no technical reason that this is required to enable E2EE for iCloud, it's purely speculation as to why Apple would roll this surveillance tool out, as a compromise to having a fully encrypted system. It is a technical requirement once you accept the moral requirement that Apple doesn't want to enable the sharing of CSAM. Once again, you are ignoring that some people think the morality of enabling (or at least not curtailing) the sharing of CSAM is a moral failing that can't be accepted.

least 5y ago
It's also illegal to operate a meth lab in your basement, but the government would still be required to have probable cause to grant a warrant to look in your house without your permission. You don't start with the premise that everyone is doing illegal things and must prove otherwise, which is what this system assumes. Your argument of it being a moral requirement is dubious. If you really wanted to stop CSAM why not we all live in glass apartments like in Zamyatin's We? To what extent would invading your privacy be acceptable to you if it means we could stop some or even all CSAM distribution and production? Once you decide that it's a moral imperative then you accept that any erosion of privacy in the interest of saving the children isn't off the table.

by slg 5y ago

least 5y ago

It's also illegal to operate a meth lab in your basement, but the government would still be required to have probable cause to grant a warrant to look in your house without your permission. You don't start with the premise that everyone is doing illegal things and must prove otherwise, which is what this system assumes. Your argument of it being a moral requirement is dubious. If you really wanted to stop CSAM why not we all live in glass apartments like in Zamyatin's We? To what extent would invading your privacy be acceptable to you if it means we could stop some or even all CSAM distribution and production? Once you decide that it's a moral imperative then you accept that any erosion of privacy in the interest of saving the children isn't off the table.