3 ms·

I’m sorry, but there is a world of difference between locally indexing files for local search and tagging files as contraband so that they can be reported to th

I’m sorry, but there is a world of difference between locally indexing files for local search and tagging files as contraband so that they can be reported to the government.

naravara 5y ago
Technically speaking, no there isn’t. It’s just a little bit if metadata you’re sticking on an already long tail of metadata that they’re doing as they index.
- shuckles 5y ago
  Most importantly, people are arguing that there is new technical risk, so a difference in intent or beneficiaries is not relevant for that argument.
- barsonme 5y ago
  Being technically similar is irrelevant. It’s completely different in principle, and that’s what matters. A great deal many things are technically similar, but vastly different in principle. And those distinctions are important.
  - snowwrestler 5y ago
    I’m not sure which side you’re arguing here. The biggest concern about Apple’s system is that it’s very easy to add new items to a hash list. That is an argument about the technical similarity of scanning for CSAM and scanning for other things like classified documents (for example). But there is a vast difference in principle. Pretty much everyone wants to stop child abuse. But many people—including major news organizations—believe citizens should sometimes have the opportunity to view classified documents. Different categories of things to scan for will be different in principle, even if the technical approach is similar. This difference in principle is what Apple leans on when they say they will oppose any request to expand their system beyond CSAM.
    - nrabulinski 5y ago
      The biggest concern about Apple’s system is that they are showing to all governments and everyone that it’s fine and good to scan for whatever on my device and report me to the government if they see fit, despite years prior refusing to implement backdoors or give access to someone’s device to the FBI. They essentially invalidated all those claims and I can’t see how they’ll now be able to argue back if the US or the Chinas come to Apple saying they have to have more surveillance in their devices.

I’m sorry, but there is a world of difference between locally indexing files for local search and tagging files as contraband so that they can be reported to the government.

naravara 5y ago

Technically speaking, no there isn’t. It’s just a little bit if metadata you’re sticking on an already long tail of metadata that they’re doing as they index.

shuckles 5y ago
Most importantly, people are arguing that there is new technical risk, so a difference in intent or beneficiaries is not relevant for that argument.
barsonme 5y ago
Being technically similar is irrelevant. It’s completely different in principle, and that’s what matters. A great deal many things are technically similar, but vastly different in principle. And those distinctions are important.
- snowwrestler 5y ago
  I’m not sure which side you’re arguing here. The biggest concern about Apple’s system is that it’s very easy to add new items to a hash list. That is an argument about the technical similarity of scanning for CSAM and scanning for other things like classified documents (for example). But there is a vast difference in principle. Pretty much everyone wants to stop child abuse. But many people—including major news organizations—believe citizens should sometimes have the opportunity to view classified documents. Different categories of things to scan for will be different in principle, even if the technical approach is similar. This difference in principle is what Apple leans on when they say they will oppose any request to expand their system beyond CSAM.
  - nrabulinski 5y ago
    The biggest concern about Apple’s system is that they are showing to all governments and everyone that it’s fine and good to scan for whatever on my device and report me to the government if they see fit, despite years prior refusing to implement backdoors or give access to someone’s device to the FBI. They essentially invalidated all those claims and I can’t see how they’ll now be able to argue back if the US or the Chinas come to Apple saying they have to have more surveillance in their devices.