Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms
Date: 25 Jul 2024 15:38:54 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <lgf9seFcg0lU2@mid.individual.net>
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> <lgclvsFbd6U3@mid.individual.net>
 <v7rb0i$1qjdv$5@dont-email.me> <lgda3pF3c6aU2@mid.individual.net>
 <v7tlf6$oir$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
X-Trace: individual.net UQOiVCcczDaCGXBR/zWPcQitA3VQheAPYuOkVXn11eO7KIFgwY
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iJJKTeigHH3CB2zA5G/W4aFInWY= sha256:TafffUfM7KUtE7OlXXJiT3rWeeghsVFXnXXQGuBc6ns=
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: _.g>n!a$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: 2800

On 2024-07-25, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 24 Jul 2024 21:30:33 GMT :
>
>>> By that argument, we must also scrap the traditional system of
>>> issuing warrants to search people's homes, because there is a
>>> non-zero rate of warrants issued in error.
>> 
>> Nah. Most warrants meet probable cause standards before a judge will
>> sign them. CSAM scanning requires no such due process. They are
>> nowhere near the same thing.
>
> When I assess that Alan Baker's IQ is the lowest of all the low-IQ
> Apple zealots, I didn't expect Jolly Roger to prove me right on that
> assessment.
>
> For Alan Baker to compare a warrant which is issued by a judge only
> after probable cause has been established on the public record (which
> the defendant has every right to object to in court, which would
> overturn his conviction) to CSAM scanning of every possible image
> uploaded, is absurd.
>
> That absurd thought process shows Alan Baker's IQ can't be above
> around 40.

Your obsession with meaningless IQ numbers says way more about you than
anyone else, little Arlen. And your continual drive to insult anyone who
disagrees with you says more about you as well. You're a weak-minded
juvenile troll in a man's body.

-- 
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