Ben, is the statement that "Apple intends to install software on American iPhones" factually correct - is Apple planning to install software on US iPhones, or will they put systems in place to scan images stored in the iCloud by American users? Big difference if you ask me (although even then it's still a form of surveillance and "big brother").
What irks me most is that they would then go on to scan for stuff like child porn and such but not other vile imagery like domestic abuse, animal abuse and I could go on. Why take measures against one form of abuse but not the other, is there some sort of agreed-upon hierarchy of evilness or whatever? It reeks of hypocrisy and it's a slippery slope, that's why companies should refrain from this.
Yes, they are going to install software on the phones. The FAQ Apple put out as well as the rest of the released documentation is very clear that all scanning will be done on-device. See the FAQ PDF for details.
The answer to your second paragraph. On one side, Apple have hashes for CP images that already exist and both the acts depicted and the images themselves are illegal. On the other side, while the acts of domestic and animal abuse are illegal, images of those acts generally aren't illegal to posses. The supposed purpose of Apples program is to combat possession of illegal CP images, not to stop the perpetration of illegal actions, so nothing hypocritical about that aspect of it.
I do agree it's a slipper slope that no company should go down.
Thanks for clarifying, sound reasoning ... possessing those images is indeed illegal, so I think they have a pretty strong case in saying, we just don't want this stuff in our cloud, ergo we need to block it ... because well, Apple could even be held liable for storing it on their servers, and being complicit in a crime.
And with the hashing technology they arguably have the least questionable approach that you can think of. So yeah slippery slope, still, but there is something to be said for this.
(if they'd not just block it but also report perpetrators to law enforcement then I'd say "bridge too far", but that's not the case, apparently)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Ben, is the statement that "Apple intends to install software on American iPhones" factually correct - is Apple planning to install software on US iPhones, or will they put systems in place to scan images stored in the iCloud by American users? Big difference if you ask me (although even then it's still a form of surveillance and "big brother").
What irks me most is that they would then go on to scan for stuff like child porn and such but not other vile imagery like domestic abuse, animal abuse and I could go on. Why take measures against one form of abuse but not the other, is there some sort of agreed-upon hierarchy of evilness or whatever? It reeks of hypocrisy and it's a slippery slope, that's why companies should refrain from this.
Yes, they are going to install software on the phones. The FAQ Apple put out as well as the rest of the released documentation is very clear that all scanning will be done on-device. See the FAQ PDF for details.
The answer to your second paragraph. On one side, Apple have hashes for CP images that already exist and both the acts depicted and the images themselves are illegal. On the other side, while the acts of domestic and animal abuse are illegal, images of those acts generally aren't illegal to posses. The supposed purpose of Apples program is to combat possession of illegal CP images, not to stop the perpetration of illegal actions, so nothing hypocritical about that aspect of it.
I do agree it's a slipper slope that no company should go down.
Thanks for clarifying, sound reasoning ... possessing those images is indeed illegal, so I think they have a pretty strong case in saying, we just don't want this stuff in our cloud, ergo we need to block it ... because well, Apple could even be held liable for storing it on their servers, and being complicit in a crime.
And with the hashing technology they arguably have the least questionable approach that you can think of. So yeah slippery slope, still, but there is something to be said for this.
(if they'd not just block it but also report perpetrators to law enforcement then I'd say "bridge too far", but that's not the case, apparently)