4 ms·

This suit seems to be in bad-faith. Apple actively pursuited this tech but that backlash from the general population due to privacy concerns was simply too hig

This suit seems to be in bad-faith. Apple actively pursuited this tech but that backlash from the general population due to privacy concerns was simply too high, so they made a business decision to respect peoples privacy (and their bottom line at that). I feel for the victims of child abuse but forcing device manufacturers to monitor everyone without warrant is an enormous violation of privacy.

CharlesW 2y ago
> …so they made a business decision to respect peoples privacy (and their bottom line at that). For the record, Apple abandoned this on-device technique because of bad press, even though it would've been more privacy-preserving than the in-cloud scanning that virtually all image hosts do today.
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  > even though it would've been more privacy-preserving than the in-cloud scanning that virtually all image hosts do today You can opt out of in-cloud scanning by not using the cloud, or selecting a different service.
  - CharlesW 2y ago
    That would have still been true, since photos not destined for iCloud Photos were not scanned.
    - JoshTriplett 2y ago
      There is no fundamental property of the technology that ensures that. Once the capability exists, how long do you think that'd stay true?
      - CharlesW 2y ago
        It exists now, since the tech was repurposed for Apple’s Communication Safety (scanning for all nudity, not just CSAM): https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing surreptitious CSAM scanning? I have no idea. All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it.
        palata 2y ago
        > All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it. Which doesn't make sense. > How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing [...] Because you don't know that your neighbour deals drugs does not make it legal.
- rangestransform 2y ago
  How about the device I own never do anything, ever to incriminate me In fact, if I own a device, it should by default do everything legal to obstruct law enforcement efforts against me because I own it and it should serve me

CharlesW 2y ago

> …so they made a business decision to respect peoples privacy (and their bottom line at that). For the record, Apple abandoned this on-device technique because of bad press, even though it would've been more privacy-preserving than the in-cloud scanning that virtually all image hosts do today.

JoshTriplett 2y ago
> even though it would've been more privacy-preserving than the in-cloud scanning that virtually all image hosts do today You can opt out of in-cloud scanning by not using the cloud, or selecting a different service.
- CharlesW 2y ago
  That would have still been true, since photos not destined for iCloud Photos were not scanned.
  - JoshTriplett 2y ago
    There is no fundamental property of the technology that ensures that. Once the capability exists, how long do you think that'd stay true?
    - CharlesW 2y ago
      It exists now, since the tech was repurposed for Apple’s Communication Safety (scanning for all nudity, not just CSAM): https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing surreptitious CSAM scanning? I have no idea. All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it.
      - palata 2y ago
        > All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it. Which doesn't make sense. > How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing [...] Because you don't know that your neighbour deals drugs does not make it legal.
rangestransform 2y ago
How about the device I own never do anything, ever to incriminate me In fact, if I own a device, it should by default do everything legal to obstruct law enforcement efforts against me because I own it and it should serve me