4 ms·

> equivalent features are not being misused on Google and Meta/Facebook's properties The objections come when such systems are to be run not on corporate prope

> equivalent features are not being misused on Google and Meta/Facebook's properties The objections come when such systems are to be run not on corporate property, but on end user property. I don't see anybody objecting to corporations scanning content uploaded to the corporation's own computers. Scanning content on the user's computer, which is the user's property, is what unnerves people. Furthermore, while Apple may have implemented this feature in a relatively safe way (I don't fully understand it so I'm not confident of that, but smart people here think it so I'll assume it for the sake of argument), I believe that the general public does not really understand this nuance and Apple normalizing the practice of scanning personal computers will clear the way for other corporations to implement scanning in shittier way. If Microsoft were to start scanning all documents on a Windows computer by uploading those documents to their own servers, is that a distinction that would necessarily be made clear to the general public? I don't think so. The rhetoric will be "Apple does it and that's fine, so Microsoft can do it too". The technical differences in the two implementations will be understood in forums like this, but not by the general public at large.

quitit 5y ago
I agree that there is a need for such changes to be public and debated - my grind comes from those which makes arguments which are neither factual, nor pay attention to the status quo. (Thus leaping to fantasy assumptions which are without basis.) For example Google and Meta both scan all material that is on their services, both of these providers actually go further by utilising AI to hunt imagery which may not be identified yet. So the idea of this compelling others to scan is false: Apple is last here. Similar to Google and Meta, Apple's CSAM processes only come into play when the material is uploaded to Apple's servers. The minutiae of where the scanning occurs is irrelevant because Apple's implementation is merely a way of performing the function without giving up the user's privacy (by scanning locally rather than sending all of your photos to Apple's servers for review.) The scanning process is merely the addition of verified hashes to a system which already uses this same technique to categorise ones photos into searchable images ("waterfalls" "dogs" "bicycles" etc.), because this is an existing system there is no impact to performance/device usage.
- BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
  > The minutiae of where the scanning occurs is irrelevant because Apple's implementation is merely a way of performing the function without giving up the user's privacy (by scanning locally rather than sending all of your photos to Apple's servers for review.) This is where you and I part ways. I don't think that's an irrelevant minutiae, because it normalizes on-device scanning. This implementation or others may change in the future and opposition to those future implementations will be hampered by "Apple was already doing it" arguments, which will sound fairly plausible to the non-technical public. Maybe I'm making a 'slippery slope' argument here, but I've become comfortable with such lines of thinking. My cynicism has been rewarded too often before.
  - quitit 5y ago
    Yet the on device scanning already exists on every platform. This is how the system makes content rapidly searchable.
    - BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
      The context of this discussion is on-device scanning that reports users to the police. It's tedious to spell this out; you should be able to infer it.
saagarjha 5y ago
> I don't see anybody objecting to corporations scanning content uploaded to the corporation's own computers. That depends on how "BYOD" the company is. There's an awful lot of companies that provide work machines that most of their employees reasonably use for some sort of personal work, be it checking their bank statements to see if they got a deposit or logging into a handful of services so their settings sync. In my opinion it is unreasonable to expect people to not do this, especially given that the alternative is quite painful with modern software. Corporate searches have a problem of not really having clear limits like a legal search might, so going through e.g. your synced web history when trying to find evidence of credential abuse (check your own audit logs!) is common.
- BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
  My understanding is that the EU has stronger privacy protections for employees using their employer's computers. Personally, I keep all my private business off my company laptop, if I want to check my bank statements I use my phone (which is not enrolled in any company system, I refuse those offers.) I don't sync a single thing between my personal computers and work computer. But yes, I see your point. Maybe there is some merit to stronger privacy protection laws in this circumstance, since so many users of corporate computers lack the inclination, awareness, discipline to keep their personal stuff off computers they use but don't own.
angulardragon03 5y ago
Photo classification takes place on device as well. The models are generated on Apple's side, but the photos on your device are classified by your device while it sleeps and charges. Check the last line on this page: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207368 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207368

quitit 5y ago

I agree that there is a need for such changes to be public and debated - my grind comes from those which makes arguments which are neither factual, nor pay attention to the status quo. (Thus leaping to fantasy assumptions which are without basis.) For example Google and Meta both scan all material that is on their services, both of these providers actually go further by utilising AI to hunt imagery which may not be identified yet. So the idea of this compelling others to scan is false: Apple is last here. Similar to Google and Meta, Apple's CSAM processes only come into play when the material is uploaded to Apple's servers. The minutiae of where the scanning occurs is irrelevant because Apple's implementation is merely a way of performing the function without giving up the user's privacy (by scanning locally rather than sending all of your photos to Apple's servers for review.) The scanning process is merely the addition of verified hashes to a system which already uses this same technique to categorise ones photos into searchable images ("waterfalls" "dogs" "bicycles" etc.), because this is an existing system there is no impact to performance/device usage.

BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
> The minutiae of where the scanning occurs is irrelevant because Apple's implementation is merely a way of performing the function without giving up the user's privacy (by scanning locally rather than sending all of your photos to Apple's servers for review.) This is where you and I part ways. I don't think that's an irrelevant minutiae, because it normalizes on-device scanning. This implementation or others may change in the future and opposition to those future implementations will be hampered by "Apple was already doing it" arguments, which will sound fairly plausible to the non-technical public. Maybe I'm making a 'slippery slope' argument here, but I've become comfortable with such lines of thinking. My cynicism has been rewarded too often before.
- quitit 5y ago
  Yet the on device scanning already exists on every platform. This is how the system makes content rapidly searchable.
  - BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
    The context of this discussion is on-device scanning that reports users to the police. It's tedious to spell this out; you should be able to infer it.

saagarjha 5y ago

> I don't see anybody objecting to corporations scanning content uploaded to the corporation's own computers. That depends on how "BYOD" the company is. There's an awful lot of companies that provide work machines that most of their employees reasonably use for some sort of personal work, be it checking their bank statements to see if they got a deposit or logging into a handful of services so their settings sync. In my opinion it is unreasonable to expect people to not do this, especially given that the alternative is quite painful with modern software. Corporate searches have a problem of not really having clear limits like a legal search might, so going through e.g. your synced web history when trying to find evidence of credential abuse (check your own audit logs!) is common.

BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
My understanding is that the EU has stronger privacy protections for employees using their employer's computers. Personally, I keep all my private business off my company laptop, if I want to check my bank statements I use my phone (which is not enrolled in any company system, I refuse those offers.) I don't sync a single thing between my personal computers and work computer. But yes, I see your point. Maybe there is some merit to stronger privacy protection laws in this circumstance, since so many users of corporate computers lack the inclination, awareness, discipline to keep their personal stuff off computers they use but don't own.

angulardragon03 5y ago

Photo classification takes place on device as well. The models are generated on Apple's side, but the photos on your device are classified by your device while it sleeps and charges. Check the last line on this page: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207368 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207368