Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms

Am 23.07.24 um 18:27 schrieb Chris:

Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

Am 23.07.24 um 13:31 schrieb Chris:

After being a bit skeptical of Apple's solution, I realised it was a pretty
good and pragmatic balance between respecting people's privacy and
protecting vulnerable people. I was disappointed that the angry "muh
freedom" brigade scuppered it.

>
It was neither a good nor an acceptable solution. This being the reason
why Apple decided against it in the end.

 It was sunk by reactionary know-it-alls. If anyone bothered looked at the
technology - which Apple published openly - they would have seen it was
pretty elegant and privacy preserving.
 It could have been a really good tool to protect children, but no, people's
non-rights were more important.

You reaction is Nazi-style: At no point in the discussion you wanted to protect innocent children. You probably have a hidden agenda.
Bigot religious groups are the biggest risk to free Western societies.
--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)