Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!tncsrv06.tnetconsulting.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Andrew <andrew@spam.net>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:52:48 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com)
Message-ID: <v7uduv$11n1$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
References: <v7mup4$7vpf$1@solani.org> <lg8ea1Fa94U1@mid.individual.net> <xn0oonlp4azqw16000@reader443.eternal-september.org> <lga2k1F7uk8U1@mid.individual.net> <xn0oonrftb7hazk002@reader443.eternal-september.org> <v7olut$19iie$1@dont-email.me> <lga8vfF8qq0U3@mid.individual.net> <v7q9vj$1l9co$1@dont-email.me> <v7qn3b$2hg0$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgcm26Fbd6U4@mid.individual.net> <v7rfko$18sp$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgda8oF3c6aU3@mid.individual.net> <v7tiln$2g2b$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <v7u2gu$2co3l$1@dont-email.me> <lgfmvgFee44U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:52:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com;
	logging-data="34529"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blueworldhosting.com"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:r4u/0bc73jK0OHD1TuGKpBrRB0M= sha256:TarZl2kbMhRDTpCvBnNT2t5QD4QSCaQZSdZ/cLDxEUc=
	sha1:GD4jRRr6WqXrGz7k3dBVbpPUwG0= sha256:G7kJTGZwJyL8ZMIu5lj3/zxAEG97pniTS38lycvnS88=
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL[`N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v  qdYsE`yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
Bytes: 3035
Lines: 30

Jolly Roger wrote on 25 Jul 2024 19:22:24 GMT :

>>> You're simply guessing. I'm using logic.  They're different logical
>>> algorithms.
>>
>> Nope. You're guessing just as much as JR. 
>>
>> The facts - and we know you like them, but never look for them - are
>> that there are many convictions on a depressingly regular basis. Just
>> look at the press releases from the DoJ Project Safe Childhood:
>> https://www.justice.gov/psc/press-room
> 
> My statements aren't guesses. There have been plenty of convictions. 
> 
> Unfortunately, there have also been privacy violations of innocent
> people. And that's my primary concern when it comes to CSAM scanning.

Chris just lied about convictions.
Why did Chris lie?

I don't know why Chris lied.
All I know is that Chris lied.

I suspect Chris felt the need to lie because he had no valid point.
The cite Chris listed said NOTHING whatsoever about the conviction rate.

It's like me saying people in Alaska are all Eskimos and when Chris asks me
to prove it I point to a long listing of Italians in Florida instead.

It's revealing that Chris has to resort to lies to defend his assessment.
It means that Chris' assessment that CSAM scanning is effective - is false.