5 ms·

It never ceases to astonish me how people keep reacting to this while apparently not really caring to understand how the thing actually works and how it fits in

It never ceases to astonish me how people keep reacting to this while apparently not really caring to understand how the thing actually works and how it fits into the existing workflows and thus what are the alternatives. I mean, I'm not surprised this whole thing backfired and that there was a strong uncanny valley reaction to the prospect of having parts of the workflow happening in your device ("a policeman in my pocket" I read somewhere). I am surprised though that it seems impossible to resolve the issue (or at least making progress in the framing of) this with a honest and nuanced conversation.

R0b0t1 5y ago
I don't want a conversation. I don't want it, and I don't want to compromise. Plenty of people think the same.
- ithkuil 5y ago
  How can you be sure to know what is it what you don't want if you want to have a conversation?
  - gigel82 5y ago
    I don't want any functionality capable of scanning photos on my device for "illegal" content; I simply don't want that code living on my device no matter how restricted its (initially planned) use is.
    - ithkuil 5y ago
      Fair enough. Framing it like that it seems like a small step from a dystopia. But let's face it, we're feet deep in it already: unless you control what code runs on your device you're never safe from code that scans data on your device. I not sure I really buy the slippery slope argument. If in the future Apple wanted to be more intrusive, they would just be more intrusive and scan your photos on your device for real, not with a convoluted and probabilistic fingerprint method. What is the weak point? To get people accustomed to being scanned? Aren't people already? Your content is already scanned the moment it reaches to the cloud. What does this extra client-side scanning add to the dystopia that we're not already experiencing?
      - gigel82 5y ago
        It's the opening of Pandora's box. Scanning your device is a huge paradigm shift; we all know the cloud is "someone else's computer" and untrustworthy but thus far one's device was sacred and no one dared touch it. The floodgates are open now; politicians and other "interested parties" have watched this unfold very carefully and gleefully noted the majority didn't care as much as everyone expected, so they'll definitely be pushing for it now. Imagine Windows Defender (an antimalware / antivirus distributed with all versions of Windows and enabled by default) starts scanning one's hard drive (and attached external drives) for image files (it already scans documents and executables and even uploads samples of malicious binaries to Microsoft for analysis): how would you / the world react?
        ithkuil 5y ago
        > Scanning your device is a huge paradigm shift But that's not what they want to do. They want to perform a client side fingerprint of a subset of images before they get uploaded to the cloud. You can argue that they could in the future turn this into a scan of everything on the device. But you can also argue that if that's what they want to do in the future they'll do it in the future. It's all about trust. If you don't trust Apple to not push nefarious code on your devices, stay away from Apple, and that's true even before all this.
- onethought 5y ago
  It’s really not a compromise. They found a way to scan your photos for illegal stuff without during upload without compromising encryption. Meanwhile all the major competitors just openly inspect All your photos. This is equivalent getting up set with Signal because it spell checks your text as you write it: “you are scanning what I write!!!!”
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > without compromising encryption. Apple holds the keys to all iCloud backups and regularly uses them in order to serve customers' data in response to data requests from the government. Apple gives up US customer data for about 150,000 users/accounts a year[1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html
    - onethought 5y ago
      As do all the competitors… but they can also access your photos for random data mining. Which no one has shown Apple do that. We know 100% google do it…
    - ithkuil 5y ago
      Yes the currently do. The goal of this new system is to allow them to no longer have such keys while at the same time not allowing just any content to be uploaded to their cloud systems. If you want to upload anything on their cloud storage you need to pre-encrypt it with some other application and the upload it as a raw file.
      - heavyset_go 5y ago
        > The goal of this new system is to allow them to no longer have such keys while at the same time not allowing just any content to be uploaded to their cloud systems. That's incredibly charitable speculation.
LudwigNagasena 5y ago
I don’t want a honest and nuanced conversation on whether Holocaust was ok or whether rape is good. This is way past any point for a nuanced conversation.
- onethought 5y ago
  That’s not at all close as an analogy. So the alternative that everyone is happy with, is companies openly scan all your images as much as they want… but we are outraged at the company trying to improve the status quo on privacy… and we don’t want to talk about it. Just stop improving!
  - LudwigNagasena 5y ago
    Just stop trying to encroach on my privacy. I don’t care whether it is done by a government or an international company with a capitalization of over two and half trillion dollars.
    - onethought 5y ago
      Right… so Apple is trying to not encroach and is punished for it. That’s kind of my point.
      - LudwigNagasena 5y ago
        The whole point of the feature is to analyze images that you possess.
        onethought 5y ago
        No. The whole point is to avoid scanning all your images on their servers and instead only scan when there is a suspicion. Ie Hash match. You will not have any of your images scanned at all, if you don’t load a certain number of images that’s metadata match known CSAM. That’s a superior position, than: everything you upload is scanned for visual features.
tibyat 5y ago
ok you're astonished. but you also haven't moved the conversation forward at all. you're just talking down on the field, "I understand everything about this topic and people's reactions to this topic, and I am disappointed in all of you." turns out it takes a lot more effort to actually make an impact, and comment sections are typically full of low effort gut reflexes. It doesn't help that every comment section starts over, progress is harder this way.
heavyset_go 5y ago
Apple already tried the "critics don't understand our system!" deflection a while ago. It's a deflection because critics' objections don't necessarily hinge on the technical implementation details of the system, they object to it based on its value proposition to the user, and on principle. Once we move past the core of those objections, then yes, some critics also object to the system's technical implementation, and some of them are correct in their analysis and some are less so.
- ithkuil 5y ago
  > they object to it based on its value proposition to the user, and on principle. Not sure everybody is on the same page what the value proposition to the user is. That's intimately tied on the "how the system works" which is not merely an implementation detail. I'd like to talk about that. Most of the threads about this topic I found are full of flames without much content. Hopefully I found somebody who can help me clarify what is it that bothers so much.
totetsu 5y ago
Snappy phrases move culture. While us nerds were having our Long honest and nuanced conversation the world moved on
mixmastamyk 5y ago
I absolutely do not want this on any devices I own. I'm preparing to destroy any Apple devices in my possession (thankfully old and due for replacement) when my pine64 arrives. Don't care about any details. How's that for nuanced?
nbzso 5y ago
Honest and nuanced conversation? I am dealing with Apple righteousness and arrogance for far too long. 20 + years to be exact. And I ended removing macOS workflow of my company because of this "privacy innovation" for the children. This corporation died long time ago, people just like the Idea of old Rebel Apple for creative minds and individuals. People actually understand how this will work. A lot of educated and high level professionals reacted with vigor. Spinning this towards "people don't understand" is blasphemy coming from serious self-delusion, no excuses given. Resolving the issue is simple: Break Big Tech monopolies and create a climate for change. AT&T break up comes to mind. It is time to wake up. User data is the petrol of the world of tomorrow. Access to user data and implementation of solutions based on it must be regulated not towards some three letter agencies wet fantasy but towards respecting individual privacy and existing laws and democratic principles. Even if Apple cancels this intrusion on user space, which I heavily doubt, and implements CSAM only on iCloud servers (as every one else), the image of Apple as an guardian of user privacy (false or not) is gone forever. People are talking about alternatives and "moving off-cloud to NAS" which is actually the right thing to do in this situation. Oh and Apple will continue to be loved. But this love will be more than biter-sweet, it will become dangerous. Some of us are old enough to know when to leave a sinking ship.
ece 5y ago
I think it's hilarious that for as long as iOS has existed, there have been people pointing out it's pitfalls in nuanced ways, and almost nobody listened. Now that everything they've said has pretty much come to pass about user freedoms, instead of accepting personal responsibility and admitting iOS flaws, people want more nuanced conversations. Utter cowardice.
gremloni 5y ago
No conversation. Just fucking no. The kids are protected enough.

R0b0t1 5y ago

I don't want a conversation. I don't want it, and I don't want to compromise. Plenty of people think the same.

ithkuil 5y ago
How can you be sure to know what is it what you don't want if you want to have a conversation?
- gigel82 5y ago
  I don't want any functionality capable of scanning photos on my device for "illegal" content; I simply don't want that code living on my device no matter how restricted its (initially planned) use is.
  - ithkuil 5y ago
    Fair enough. Framing it like that it seems like a small step from a dystopia. But let's face it, we're feet deep in it already: unless you control what code runs on your device you're never safe from code that scans data on your device. I not sure I really buy the slippery slope argument. If in the future Apple wanted to be more intrusive, they would just be more intrusive and scan your photos on your device for real, not with a convoluted and probabilistic fingerprint method. What is the weak point? To get people accustomed to being scanned? Aren't people already? Your content is already scanned the moment it reaches to the cloud. What does this extra client-side scanning add to the dystopia that we're not already experiencing?
    - gigel82 5y ago
      It's the opening of Pandora's box. Scanning your device is a huge paradigm shift; we all know the cloud is "someone else's computer" and untrustworthy but thus far one's device was sacred and no one dared touch it. The floodgates are open now; politicians and other "interested parties" have watched this unfold very carefully and gleefully noted the majority didn't care as much as everyone expected, so they'll definitely be pushing for it now. Imagine Windows Defender (an antimalware / antivirus distributed with all versions of Windows and enabled by default) starts scanning one's hard drive (and attached external drives) for image files (it already scans documents and executables and even uploads samples of malicious binaries to Microsoft for analysis): how would you / the world react?
      - ithkuil 5y ago
        > Scanning your device is a huge paradigm shift But that's not what they want to do. They want to perform a client side fingerprint of a subset of images before they get uploaded to the cloud. You can argue that they could in the future turn this into a scan of everything on the device. But you can also argue that if that's what they want to do in the future they'll do it in the future. It's all about trust. If you don't trust Apple to not push nefarious code on your devices, stay away from Apple, and that's true even before all this.
onethought 5y ago
It’s really not a compromise. They found a way to scan your photos for illegal stuff without during upload without compromising encryption. Meanwhile all the major competitors just openly inspect All your photos. This is equivalent getting up set with Signal because it spell checks your text as you write it: “you are scanning what I write!!!!”
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > without compromising encryption. Apple holds the keys to all iCloud backups and regularly uses them in order to serve customers' data in response to data requests from the government. Apple gives up US customer data for about 150,000 users/accounts a year[1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html
  - onethought 5y ago
    As do all the competitors… but they can also access your photos for random data mining. Which no one has shown Apple do that. We know 100% google do it…
  - ithkuil 5y ago
    Yes the currently do. The goal of this new system is to allow them to no longer have such keys while at the same time not allowing just any content to be uploaded to their cloud systems. If you want to upload anything on their cloud storage you need to pre-encrypt it with some other application and the upload it as a raw file.
    - heavyset_go 5y ago
      > The goal of this new system is to allow them to no longer have such keys while at the same time not allowing just any content to be uploaded to their cloud systems. That's incredibly charitable speculation.

LudwigNagasena 5y ago

I don’t want a honest and nuanced conversation on whether Holocaust was ok or whether rape is good. This is way past any point for a nuanced conversation.

onethought 5y ago
That’s not at all close as an analogy. So the alternative that everyone is happy with, is companies openly scan all your images as much as they want… but we are outraged at the company trying to improve the status quo on privacy… and we don’t want to talk about it. Just stop improving!
- LudwigNagasena 5y ago
  Just stop trying to encroach on my privacy. I don’t care whether it is done by a government or an international company with a capitalization of over two and half trillion dollars.
  - onethought 5y ago
    Right… so Apple is trying to not encroach and is punished for it. That’s kind of my point.
    - LudwigNagasena 5y ago
      The whole point of the feature is to analyze images that you possess.
      - onethought 5y ago
        No. The whole point is to avoid scanning all your images on their servers and instead only scan when there is a suspicion. Ie Hash match. You will not have any of your images scanned at all, if you don’t load a certain number of images that’s metadata match known CSAM. That’s a superior position, than: everything you upload is scanned for visual features.

tibyat 5y ago

ok you're astonished. but you also haven't moved the conversation forward at all. you're just talking down on the field, "I understand everything about this topic and people's reactions to this topic, and I am disappointed in all of you." turns out it takes a lot more effort to actually make an impact, and comment sections are typically full of low effort gut reflexes. It doesn't help that every comment section starts over, progress is harder this way.

heavyset_go 5y ago

Apple already tried the "critics don't understand our system!" deflection a while ago. It's a deflection because critics' objections don't necessarily hinge on the technical implementation details of the system, they object to it based on its value proposition to the user, and on principle. Once we move past the core of those objections, then yes, some critics also object to the system's technical implementation, and some of them are correct in their analysis and some are less so.

ithkuil 5y ago
> they object to it based on its value proposition to the user, and on principle. Not sure everybody is on the same page what the value proposition to the user is. That's intimately tied on the "how the system works" which is not merely an implementation detail. I'd like to talk about that. Most of the threads about this topic I found are full of flames without much content. Hopefully I found somebody who can help me clarify what is it that bothers so much.

totetsu 5y ago

Snappy phrases move culture. While us nerds were having our Long honest and nuanced conversation the world moved on

mixmastamyk 5y ago

I absolutely do not want this on any devices I own. I'm preparing to destroy any Apple devices in my possession (thankfully old and due for replacement) when my pine64 arrives. Don't care about any details. How's that for nuanced?

nbzso 5y ago

Honest and nuanced conversation? I am dealing with Apple righteousness and arrogance for far too long. 20 + years to be exact. And I ended removing macOS workflow of my company because of this "privacy innovation" for the children. This corporation died long time ago, people just like the Idea of old Rebel Apple for creative minds and individuals. People actually understand how this will work. A lot of educated and high level professionals reacted with vigor. Spinning this towards "people don't understand" is blasphemy coming from serious self-delusion, no excuses given. Resolving the issue is simple: Break Big Tech monopolies and create a climate for change. AT&T break up comes to mind. It is time to wake up. User data is the petrol of the world of tomorrow. Access to user data and implementation of solutions based on it must be regulated not towards some three letter agencies wet fantasy but towards respecting individual privacy and existing laws and democratic principles. Even if Apple cancels this intrusion on user space, which I heavily doubt, and implements CSAM only on iCloud servers (as every one else), the image of Apple as an guardian of user privacy (false or not) is gone forever. People are talking about alternatives and "moving off-cloud to NAS" which is actually the right thing to do in this situation. Oh and Apple will continue to be loved. But this love will be more than biter-sweet, it will become dangerous. Some of us are old enough to know when to leave a sinking ship.

ece 5y ago

I think it's hilarious that for as long as iOS has existed, there have been people pointing out it's pitfalls in nuanced ways, and almost nobody listened. Now that everything they've said has pretty much come to pass about user freedoms, instead of accepting personal responsibility and admitting iOS flaws, people want more nuanced conversations. Utter cowardice.

gremloni 5y ago

No conversation. Just fucking no. The kids are protected enough.