Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:

Chris wrote on Wed, 24 Jul 2024 06:53:02 -0000 (UTC) :
 

First off, I can't even spell CSAM and I don't even know what it stands
for, although I'm sure I could look it up if I cared just to find it's
perhaps it's some well marketed acronym of something related to child porn.

 
You're depraved if you genuinely believe CSAM is just marketing.
 
It's people like you - who don't care about the real harms being done -
that ruin perfectly good ideas because it has some tiny (probably
theoretical) impact on your lives.

 
Bullshit.
 
Chris. Please put your well-educated adult hat on when you read this.
Warning: There is math involved in sensibly logical thought processes.

You present no maths. Just baseless supposition.

1. There is NOTHING in the news articles about conviction rates.
2. Let's say that another way: The articles are complete bullshit!
 
The articles are yellow journalism clickbait, Chris.
 
Without specifying conviction rates, the number of reported images is
completely meaningless, Chris.
 
In fact, it could be Apple's conviction rate is far greater than that oF
Google & Facebook for all we know, Chris.
 
Since the conviction rate isn't stated, I will assume it is zero.
Think about that.

You're only making that assumption because it suits your preference and
bias.

There might have been thousands of arrests and convictions. Or will be in
the future as the investigations can take a while.

For absolutely zero gain in child safety, all our privacy was compromised.

Simply a convenience for you to think like that.