Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.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: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 02:33:01 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com)
Message-ID: <v7v1st$14c6$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
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> <v7q92v$1l4i5$1@dont-email.me> <v7qnha$bnp$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgclidFbd6U2@mid.individual.net> <v7revb$182$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgda13F3c6aU1@mid.individual.net> <v7tm0h$1nmm$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgfa27Fcg0lU3@mid.individual.net> <v7udb5$4qn$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <lgft48FfbfnU1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 02:33:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com;
	logging-data="37254"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blueworldhosting.com"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mlz/G3Wic38Wi6Xby1BoyuO6530= sha256:GBV/pM5Wd5X3yuEixkKFDIu407SBzYrgUfTrfhQRZGM=
	sha1:yu4S5LLaa8zHbnjLVKh8Tgf2c8I= sha256:7b5SDrGSys7TmIhPcWKIIo5FcoKZJ1qhGE35XPpm8rY=
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL[`N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v  qdYsE`yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
Bytes: 3049
Lines: 32

Jolly Roger wrote on 25 Jul 2024 21:07:20 GMT :

>> The question isn't that it's a violation of privacy.
>> The question is whether it's worth that violation of privacy.
> 
> Ask the innocent people who have their privacy violated whether it was
> worth it, and see what they tell you.

Well, everyone who has photos that Google, Apple and Facebook can 'see',
have been violated, and as far as we know, there have been zero convictions
based on those reports by Apple, Google and Facebook. 

Since you lack a normal IQ, which is why you don't have a formal education,
you need to understand that I didn't say people aren't convicted, JR.

I said there's no evidence presented that the reports by Apple, Google and
Facebook resulted in any convictions (so we have to assume it's zero).

The problem here, as any intelligent adult can instantly comprehend, is if
the conviction rate based on the reports is 1%, is it worth the privacy
violation of millions, nay, billions of people by Apple/Google/FB?

At what percent conviction rate is the loss in privacy worth it?
1% ?
2% ?
3% ?
5% ?
8% ?

Note the fact the articles blamed Apple and yet they omitted the most
important metric is a hint that they know the conviction rate is dismal.

Because nobody is that stupid to not ask what the conviction rate is.