Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms
Date: 28 Jul 2024 02:36:58 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <lglp69Fd7bmU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <v7mup4$7vpf$1@solani.org> <v7o49q$16cpi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7obdd$17fqi$2@dont-email.me> <v7olme$19gq3$1@dont-email.me>
 <lga95bF8qq0U4@mid.individual.net>
 <v7p2b2$1oe$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <v7p2ti$8ank$1@solani.org>
 <v7p9p4$2vns$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <v7rclp$1r24r$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7rgf4$27ab$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <v80d9a$2s7ns$3@dont-email.me> <v80ffa$2nqsj$1@dont-email.me>
 <lgi08aFq6vhU3@mid.individual.net>
 <v83g0s$qcf$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <v83g5h$3gnr9$1@dont-email.me>
X-Trace: individual.net jeMa9YlPjpeot6pITLab8g6WKeiZBUuqLdcKU8UoAaZm4LoZ5o
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D1Z+rGXluOD6aRZjp2k/1TmytD0= sha256:m4NYK8p1zU/xrCFMYy7lx0KLAoe1wSMwBZDHeoDVLCg=
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1<n@LQ!aZ7vLO_nWbK~@T'XIS0,oAJcU.qLM
 dk/j8Udo?O"o9B9Jyx+ez2:B<nx(k3EdHnTvB]'eoVaR495,Rv~/vPa[e^JI+^h5Zk*i`Q;ezqDW<
 ZFs6kmAJWZjOH\8[$$7jm,Ogw3C_%QM'|H6nygNGhhl+@}n30Nz(^vWo@h>Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e
 up1/bO{=-)
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Darwin)
Bytes: 2564

On 2024-07-27, Arlen can't deal <with@truth.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-27 11:58, Andrew wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 26 Jul 2024 16:12:58 GMT :
>> 
>>>> But that is quite literally the only tool he has!
>>>
>>> It really is. When his lies are laid bare and shown to be false, he
>>> inevitably just doubles down and tells them over and over again. It's
>>> extremely childish.
>> 
>> I find it rather interesting that the zealots claim an essentially 100%
>> conviction rate based on the Apple/Google/Facebook CSAM reports...
>
> Arlen...
>
> ...why must you lie?
>
> Literally no one has made that claim.

He's so predictable and childish. 

First he says there have been "absolutely zero" convictions as a result
of CSAM scanning.

Then he says there are "probably zero" convictions.

Now he fabricates others supposedly saying "essentially 100% conviction
rate" when literally nobody said
that.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR