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: 25 Jul 2024 21:12:36 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <lgfte4FfbfnU2@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>
 <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>
 <v7uduv$11n1$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
X-Trace: individual.net wHi0y/3Koge4cDj6QaJrqgBBSG8dei9PqH+WxZuj7GpTG2RWs8
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rcXdIQJDWMjAkOUn8sETe52msEQ= sha256:7B0o6yTahOsALX2o10YZUNql4M/gZxNQJscrvjK+ePM=
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: _.g>n!a$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: 2780

On 2024-07-25, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> 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.
>
> The cite Chris listed said NOTHING whatsoever about the conviction
> rate.

It certainly shows the conviction rate is higher than your claimed
"absolute zero". So it seems it was you who lied first. I realize you
want us to ignore this, but your focus on who lied demands we recognize
it.

-- 
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