Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms

Chris wrote on Mon, 29 Jul 2024 06:50:53 -0000 (UTC) :

You not comprehending the difference between zero percent of Apple reports
versus zero total convictions is how I know you zealots own subnormal IQs.

 
Not at all. My position hasn't changed. You, however, have had about three
different positions on this thread and keep getting confused which one
you're arguing for. lol.

Au contraire

Because I only think logically, my rather sensible position has never
changed, Chris, and the fact you "think" it has changed is simply that you
don't know the difference between the percentage of convictions based on
the number of reports, and the total number of convictions.

When you figure out that those two things are different, then (and only
then) will you realize I've maintained the same position throughout.

Specifically....

a. If the Apple reporting rate is low, and yet if their conviction
   rate is high (based on the number of reports), then they are NOT
   underreporting images.

b. If the FB/Google reporting rate is high, and yet if their conviction
   rate is low (based on the number of reports), then they are
   overreporting images.

c. None of us know if either is true unless and until we know the   
   conviction rates per Apple, Facebook, & Google - which are not
   in the reports (which were aimed to lambaste Apple).

d. That conviction rate information is so important, that nobody
   is so stupid to not ASK for it BEFORE making any assessments.

e. Given the people who wrote those reports are not likely to be
   stupid, the fact they left out the most important factor,
   directly implies the obvious, based on the omission itself.

Now what do you think that omitted fact directly implies, Chris?