Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 09:22:52 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <v7olct$18l87$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v7mup4$7vpf$1@solani.org> <lg8ea1Fa94U1@mid.individual.net>
 <xn0oonlp4azqw16000@reader443.eternal-september.org>
 <lga2k1F7uk8U1@mid.individual.net>
 <xn0oonrftb7hazk002@reader443.eternal-september.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 18:22:53 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c8e30ff7e1ebc3fa5ed4590da2693fb9";
	logging-data="1332487"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18x2cTLOUSKs6YC8z9gv775VInZm/UE9lU="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pdB4zFnV2bbrkOOgU7XN/2WZKWo=
In-Reply-To: <xn0oonrftb7hazk002@reader443.eternal-september.org>
Content-Language: en-CA
Bytes: 2548

On 2024-07-23 09:21, badgolferman wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
> 
>> On 2024-07-23, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-23, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple declined to comment on the NSPCC's accusation, instead
>>>>> pointing  The Guardian to a statement it made when it shelved
>>>>> the  CSAM scanning  plan.  Apple said it opted for a different
>>>>> strategy  that “prioritizes  the security and privacy of [its]
>>>>> users.” The  company told Wired in  August 2022 that "children
>>>>> can be protected  without companies combing  through personal
>>>>> data."
>>>>
>>>> This is one reason many people choose Apple over alternatives.
>>>
>>> iPhone.  The preferred mobile device of child molestors.
>>>
>>> This could be a new marketing ploy someday!
>>
>> Privacy for everyone is important.
> 
> Sorry, I can't agree with that.  Some people give up their right to
> privacy when they harm others or society.  The laws are there for
> everyone, not just those who choose to follow them.

He said it poorly, but "privacy for everyone" IS important in that when 
you create a system that purports only to take privacy away from the bad 
actors, you are really taking it away from everyone.