Honestly I'm glad to see a non-insignificant amount of people in tech take this seriously, especially when the goal Apple announces appears to be for the greater good. It can be hard to stand on the side that doesn't immediately appear to be correct. We have already lost so many freedoms for 'national security' and other such blanket terminology.
Just be warned, there will be those that unfairly try to cast this as helping the distribution of CP. Expect a headline tomorrow: "Edward Snowden et al Supports Child Porn" - or some other hot take.
A few other things:
1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
2. Actively support projects you align with - If you use some open source hardware/software, try to help out (financially or time).
3. Make others aware - Reach out to those around you and inform them, only then they can make an informed choice themselves.
> a non-insignificant amount of people in tech take this seriously
We're all here to make ourselves feel good saying we Took A Stand.
In reality, four weeks from now, do you think anybody will still be talking about it?
I made this same mistake. I was pretty convinced that people were taking Copilot seriously, and that there was possibly going to be ramifications for Microsoft. I wasn't particularly looking forward to it, but I rated it as plausible.
One stonewall and a few weeks later, here we are. Hardly a word anymore about it.
I think if there's going to be any real, long-term change, we have to find a way to combat the real threat: life goes on.
(Made me smile to phrase it like that, actually. That wasn't the combat I had in mind...)
It's true, though. Ask anyone in a month whether they take this seriously. They'll say yes. And what's it worth?
It's all we can do, of course. But that's just another way of saying we're powerless.
Like it or not, we aren't in control. And unless we can figure a way to get some measure of control, then what are we doing here, really?
Your three bullet points are wonderful, and I agree entirely with them. And it won't change a damn thing.
The typical Apple customer is forking over thousands of dollars. They have substantial control. This isn't like a government where you need a plurality of voters to agree before anything starts to happen.
Apple is running software on their phone that will either (a) do nothing or (b) call the police on them. The situation is questionable even for a normal consumer, let alone a nervous one. Maybe most people will weigh up the situation and keep buying Apple. But they are making a choice, they aren't powerless. And some will start asking how important smartphones really are.
My question is, who has funded this feature all the way from PoC to product? How did Apple calculate the ROI on this feature?
It’s not like end users are tripping over themselves to have all their photos scanned. Does Apple just have gobs of money to burn on things like this that will not increase its bottom line by even one penny?
There is probably funded from somewhere, and I’d like to know who is paying for it.
Probably, as other commenters have said, a mix of behind-the-scenes political pressure to give feds access to phone data for people they’re interested in and an effort to get them to back down on anti-trust and other things that governments are realizing they can milk tech companies for more money on.
For starters, please give up the defeatist attitude. They deserve the frontlash; even if it serves no purpose, as you describe it.
Apple have placed 'Privacy' at the core of their messaging, in order to sell their high-end products. In comparison to the already excessive pearl clutching based on moral panic within the ecosystem e.g. sanitising and censoring language and apps. This is a scope-creep via thought terminating clichés like 'think of the children' and the boogeymen, which will not be enough of an explanation, when Apple ID's start getting locked out for capturing entirely innocent moments of their children's lives, or the intimate holiday snaps etc. Conversely, someone can weaponise it by sending you content that will besmirch your good name, or send you away for a stint in prison.
Nonetheless, they will be a couple of moves away from either a lawsuit/collective action or a pushback from consumers, especially when the algorithm (wrongly) labels you as paedo, porn baron or worse -- then placing you in a Kafkaesque nightmare to explain yourself.
They’ll scan content if you have it set to goto iCloud so as to avoid being an accomplice.
Turn off sync to iCloud, make local backups only.
Who is to say politicians who started threatening tech companies publicly haven’t made threats behind closed doors about Apple maybe being on the hook as an accomplice for distribution?
My company only exists because our CEO had input on an executive order years ago. We hardly “made it” in the free market.
The headlines never tell the full story. Media colludes with politics to generate “the right” sentiment. The spec and implementation details aren’t being discussed, just classic speculation on privacy and overreach.
So much for this site having a higher level of discourse and it’s efforts to dissuade repetitive and knee jerk commentary though.
We’d have nicer things if we discussed how things work and instead of what corporate media wants us to discuss.
What we should really be hammering on I think is the vendor lock-in, walled garden, and monopolistic aspects.
To me this CP scanning nonsense is Apple waving a carrot in front of the Establishment to get the Anti-Trust heat off, while selling everyone else on further degrading privacy through a slam dunk deliverable to satisfy the short-game players, but that's just me.
If the public isn’t going to push back against establishment politics looking like they did 100 years ago, good luck.
Like waves and particles; it starts with individuals changing their behavior.
But we’d all rather sit around debating ephemeral abstraction (a lot like religion), reconfirming math and the physical universe still work as discovered years ago, as we’re all still “rich enough” the bottom falling out hasn’t gotten to us yet, political problems are for the poor.
The below links encapsulate some parts of why Apple cannot be continually trusted with customer data, or viewed as a paragon for privacy/security. There have been numerous examples, past and present e.g. The Fappening, T2 Chip flaws, atrocious leaks of customer data, Pegasus etc.
Some people with technical prowess, although not deluded, buy these devices with limited desire to constantly tweak or circumvent security features, especially when these devices claim to have them baked in and promise not to intrude.
>So much for this site having a higher level of discourse and it’s efforts to dissuade repetitive and knee jerk commentary though.
I am invested in this ecosystem, so the topic has a certain resonance. I resent your implication that my response to the original author was knee-jerk commentary. Furthermore, I responded to their nonchalance with a view to furnish a counterpoint.
Can’t speak for everybody of course, but I am currently planning the migration away from the Apple ecosystem and I’m heavily invested (watch, phone, MacBook, Mac Pro, Apple TV).
I’ve also been recommending to friends and family to move to droids with microG.
The largest concern I have for them is that they’re stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea.
Most people aren’t going to run a droid without google, or Linux on the desktop.
> I am currently planning the migration away from the Apple ecosystem
Me too. I told my wife today that I'll be looking at a feature phone as I'm not sure I can be bothered with jumping through all the hoops required to de-Google an Android phone. I remember a time before mobile phones, I was just fine without one - smartphones aren't that good, just convenient.
It's good that you're principled enough to do that but you guys will be rounding errors in Apple's revenue. Most people don't even know about this and those that do, most wont care. Even of those who do know and do care, most aren't motivated enough to change their habits beyond writing a few angry words on a forum Apple are never going to read anyway. Those that do change their buying habits, yourselves, are by far in the minority. And while you might have some influence over what tech your friends, family and significant other might buy, let's be completely honest, it's not going to be enough to sway them into using an unbranded phone over a feature that they themselves likely don't care much about but happily assume the role of outrage when around you because we are generally social animals.
This is companies consistently get away with pissing off their customers. It's the same reason politicians get away with pissing off their electorate. Even in a crowded space people seldom get outraged enough to change their buying habits. But in an industry where the options are already limited (Android or iOS) and where people only buy products, at most, once every two years...? Sorry but literally nobody outside your social circle will notice if you stopped buying Apple products.
I get this is a depressing response and I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't follow through with your threat. But I hear this threat posted unironically a lot and it seems to me that people think they have the power to invoke change simply by moaning on a few message boards or buying a competitors products for a couple of years (then that competitor does something to earn our outrage and we're back to the first company again). But real change takes effort. A lot of effort. More effort than most are willing to commit. Hence why the GP rightfully commented that in a months time people will have moved on to their next outrage.
The best you can do is raise tech awareness, take apple interviews and cite this reason for not moving forward. Facebook faced constraint not just after a avalanche of bad press but also as the tech workers (employees and applicants) pushed back and worked to improve things. The biggest asset in information economy is the people; the employees can enact change. See many examples in how Google direction has been influenced in military contracts or what not.
Facebook hasn't changed -- if anything, they're bigger now and sucking up more personal data than ever. Your Google example is an interesting one though it's worth noting it was the employees who objected. However it's not inconceivable that a public outcry could cause Apple employees to rethink and then challenge their management's decision.
I completely agree, I have managed to influence parts of my family and a few friends to shift to better products (like Signal) but I simply don't like having all of my communications scanned by anyone, whether it be by disinterested (in me particularly) humans or computers. The often unspoken (ha) part of free speech is the bit about it being my choice to whom and when I share my thoughts. That means a lot to me. Apple, Google, Twitter and Facebook will go on without me but they will only find out about me second hand, and that's fine by me.
What you are saying isn't that depressing, I think it makes a lot of sense. But perceived abuses do take time for people to eventually take action that can actually effect companies/states bottom lines.
I can imagine at some point a 0day targeting iOS devices that when they connect to a public wifi network with a compromised router, it distributes CP malware/botnet on to their device and then everyone else that connects to that device in the future (muddying the waters).
Similar actions could also be taken against other companies and state entities systems.
And these actions don't need to rely on most of the population to take them.
The more these "kill chain" like systems become automated and cheap to deploy, the more incentive individuals will have to pursue these types of attacks.
I think the problem with your response is that you aren't proposing anything better. It just sounds like you're saying "give in, it doesn't make a difference anyway".
That capitulating, "crabs in a barrel" attitude is why things are the way they are. The majority just sits around waiting for something to happen and for some miracle to happen; for a leader to show up, galvanize the masses to change their ways and save the day. At the same time you don't believe that will ever happen, so you stay complacent, non-active and immobile (physically and mentally).
Stop preaching futility and do something positive. Try and be the positive change you want to see. Just because you've given up doesn't mean you have to try and convince somebody else to give up. You're part of the problem.
> I think the problem with your response is that you aren't proposing anything better.
That's because I honestly can't think of anything better. However that doesn't make my response invalid.
> The majority just sits around waiting for something to happen and for some miracle to happen; for a leader to show up, galvanize the masses to change their ways and save the day. At the same time you don't believe that will ever happen, so you stay complacent, non-active and immobile (physically and mentally).
I think the issue is more that most people are too busy with their own lives to give a crap about a theoretical problem that doesn't visibly and directly affect them. We've head leaders before and it didn't change people's attitudes. If Snowden couldn't influence people's behaviours then what chance does a few random posts on a niche message board have?
> Stop preaching futility and do something positive. Try and be the positive change you want to see. Just because you've given up doesn't mean you have to try and convince somebody else to give up. You're part of the problem.
That's a bit harsh. I'm just as free to post my views are you are to post yours. And if you can't be arsed to get off your seat and campaign for real change then you're in no position to delegate that responsibility onto me.
Also I think you misunderstand the point of my post. I'm not trying to talk people out of action. In fact I've explicitly stated otherwise when I said "It's good that you're principled enough" and "I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't follow through with your threat". I'm just expressing my expectations about the futility of it all. A futile action can still give ourselves comfort that we've done the right thing even if we know it will make no wider change: like how I always vote in each election despite my constituency being so overwhelmingly in favour of the opposition that my vote is literally meaningless.
If yourself switching manufacturer brings yourself comfort that you've done the right thing then that's reason enough to change. But the pragmatic truth of the matter is that it'll take more than that to influence a company as large and successful as Apple.
I think your proclamation of it all being futile is a bit premature and can be disheartening for those that do want to act. It may even play a part in negative change, leading to some people dropping their original intention because you successfully convinced them that nothing can possibly change.
Yet, I'm not convinced that you can reasonably know this. So if we can all agree that what's happening here with Apple is a bad thing, perhaps it's for the best to refrain from posting pessimistic takes?
All actions have consequences, even posting to a message board. I think it is wise to formulate an intended consequence in mind before you act.
Same. I’m strongly considering donating to CalyxOS as they are a nonprofit.
The biggest reason I dumped Android years ago (the last Android phone I had was a galaxy nexus or nexus one) was because of the lengthy process to reflash a phone with something like aosp or (at the time) cyanogen. Each model was different. Ultimately I decided I didn’t have time for that and battery life was atrocious. Like I had batteries stashed all over the place.
I figure something like CalyxOS seems to have a good feedback and reputation here. And a donation helps them and allows me to bypass hours of tinkering on xd forums.
Ultimately I think I’m locked in iOS for now as my phone is dual sim and the esim is a company provided line. So I will either have to revert to carrying two devices again or just maintain the calyx/pixel as my bailout device in case my job suddenly my vanishes (like the current device I have in safe keeping)
Do you remember a time when you had to make a plan with a friend to meet at a specific place at a specific time and if one of you wasn't there or had a last minute problem there was probably no way to contact the other person? That was annoying, true.
I also refused to get a mobile phone for years, much to the chagrin of my girlfriend(s). It meant I used to come home to an answering machine full of messages and feel much more loved than I ever have with the immediate drip feed of messages I get now.
I wonder, what will I really miss that a book and a dumbphone won't be able to replace in my life? Perhaps the maps.
Are you in North America? Which feature phone would you suggest? The Nokia 3310 was likely the only phone I was considering, but it’s ancient and 3G and doesn’t seem very future proof.
Oh, I’d forgotten that they made a new phone with the same model number in 2017.
Even Nokia’s website seems confused about it because it claims the 2017 3310 is a 2G (“GSM: 900/1800 MHz“) device. That can’t be true of even a low-end 2017 device. It wouldn’t even work on many modern networks without at least having 3G!
I suspect it might be more effective to go to an Apple store and attempt to return your iphone and iPad (though probably they are outside of return windows.)
I’m seriously considering doing that. Make it painful for the local staff by demanding a refund. Don’t take no for an answer for quite some time. Explain that they just broke the product with a remote update that you had no choice in, so thats why you’re only returning it now. When they ask how it broke explain that they started scanning all your content, thereby claiming it as their own. If they want to own the phone, then they need to buy it back. Etc.
No, I didn't agree to automatic updates by turning it on. In fact, I don't have automatic updates turned on.
What happened is that I updated based on what Apple claimed the update did, but they were lying. Contract law would seem to be on my side in such a case.
You can run an Android device without ever signing into anything Google. F-droid and Aurora store, APK direct downloads. It is possible. I tried GrapheneOS, but am concerned about long-term development, hardware compromises. Their Element/Matrix threads can get very toxic.
A typical defeatist neo-luddism stance. You are part of the problem.
Instead of spreading your nihilism, you could be a force for good. We are not powerless. We can make a difference.
Contact your elected officials. Start a movement. Create a direct competitor to Apple. I know it’s tough, but we all just need to come together and stop the negativity.
Contacting your local representative is the right move. Bear in mind this change is specifically to comply with a law mandating the scanning of photos stored in the cloud, that’s why apart from the opt in for children’s iMessages, it only applies to photos you upload to iCloud storage.
The way to stop companies complying with the law is to get the law changed.
> I was pretty convinced that people were taking Copilot seriously
I think people used Copilot and realised it was a bit of a nothing burger.
> find a way to combat the real threat: life goes on.
That's the curse of the news cycle. But actions that do live on are monetary ones. When Apple miss sales targets, perhaps they will take note.
> Your three bullet points are wonderful, and I agree entirely with them. And it won't change a damn thing.
I think the last one is the most important, if each of us here can multiply the awareness of the problem, we can start to make real difference. Tech people have a massive influence over what devices ordinary people buy, after all, who will they go to for tech advice?
> I'm not sure what to do about it.
It's a tough problem, but what I do know is that doing nothing will 100% change nothing.
Indeed. The PinePhone is my current plan for ditching my iPhone. I had planned to upgrade to the new 13 this fall, so thank goodness this happened now. Apple just saved me a lot of money!
Yes you are. Leave the default and don’t enable this for your children’s iPhones, and the iMessage change won’t affect you. Switch off iCloud photo storage and none of your photos will be scanned. You have complete control over this.
I can't have a phone or a computer that snoops on me to this degree. So for me I definitely won't change or forget in a week. Unless they solve it, there's no more Mac or iPhone for me.
You can do two things:
- fight : you will either join the establishment or have your life ruined but you won't change things
- adapt : accept the things are the way they are and make the best of the situation
In either case you can still get caught by the machine and get ground up, it has always been like that and as long as we are human it will always be like that.
Any change that will happen is generational, 20 or 40 years from now the issues that are important to you now will be addressed by people who floated up to the top and are in position to make changes.
I still hope there is a chance that Apple may change course after they realise they may not have thought this through very well.
Especially the argument that this can be weaponised really easily worries me, and it looks like they overlooked it.
For example: some joker sends you a Whatsapp with a lewd picture, WhatsApp by default saves all pictures to your photo roll => you are now on the naughty list.
I really hope they come up with a good answer to that one (or just abandon this unholy plan).
I actually view this as not a good sign. That many are still in the very very early stage of shock, what Apple is doing does not align with their perceived values. Deducting points from Apple in their own mental model. They write these letter because they think Apple is still mostly good and hope they could have a change of heart.
What would happen as some others have pointed out, people will forget about it. Apple will bump out decent Mac products line, along with very good iPhone hardware in a few months time. Which will add points back to their mental model.
"May be Apple is really doing it in good faith"
"They aren't so bad, let's wait and see."
Apple's marketing and PR have changed in the past 5 - 6 years. My guess is their KPI had changed. And they will ( successfully ) white wash any doubt you have. And 2022 Q1 results ( That is the iPhone 13 launch quarter ) will be record breaking again.
And that is not even including competition. I mean for pete sake is Microsoft or Google even trying to compete? ( I give credit to their Surface Laptop and Pixel team, but still far from enough )
It might be hard to understand, but iOS is a blackbox. Based on what they add and say, we still don't know what exactly is happening. All we have is trust. We can speculate that with "what ifs", but same "if" is applying already.
Once we take other big platforms on account, Apple is actually trying to note privacy. Other platforms just scan everything you put in cloud, but Apple tries to limit the information what they acquire, by scanning it on device. And based on their specification, they scan locally only what is going into the cloud. It took me a while to realize, but this is improvement for what has been happening in the industry for years already.
They did not scan everything. Only suspected ones, this expands scope to everyone by default. But this is still improvement. We might see followup as added E2EE services which was not possible before.
> I mean for pete sake is Microsoft or Google even trying to compete?
Forget the evil monopolies. Consider GNU/Linux phones, Librem 5 and Pinehone. They may not be ready for an average user, but the HN audience can take advantage of them and help their develoment.
If open phones actually do get market traction (and I'm hoping they do), then I'm pretty sure that Apple/Google/etc will attempt to get laws passed banning them.
There are all sort of avenues that could be taken for such laws unfortunately. :/
Would you? How often do you come into contact with the OS when developing for a phone, let alone use a phone?
Phones are products for people who use them. What sells phones is not what OS is underneath layers and layers of code, but user experience. If we are to even hope for alternatives, this is where the focus needs to be.
If the OS underneath mattered the Nokia Communicator would have been a runaway success. It wasn’t. It was a useless brick of a computer that almost couldn’t do anything compared to even the first generations of smart phones from Apple and Google.
>How often do you come into contact with the OS when developing for a phone, let alone use a phone
That's exactly the point,
Maybe you don't know what Plan9 is, but see it like that:
The Phone is just a Terminal. If i want todo business i connect my terminal to my Workplace-servers, every application, datas and settings are there, the calculation heavy stuff and backup is made on the server. If finished i connect to my private plan9-cluster, the Phone is just a bit more than a intelligent Terminal.
The difference is with a plan9 phone you would ~never have anything todo with software ON the phone, let alone having to worry to "sync" to the cloud to make backups, update Apps or need to encrypt the datas in case of loss.
It's a bit like Cloud-gaming or Virtual Desktops with thin-clients, but much much more integrated.
Slightly problematic when your phone loses service, but I get where you are coming from. It would be nice for that to be viable, we’re probably decades away from having good enough network connectivity.
Most of the attraction of 5G isn't really anything you as a consumer will ever see. Like more advanced spectrum management and more advanced core network components that allow what you can think of as "virtualization with quality of service guarantees" for multiple tenants. On top of that 5G also makes use of higher frequency spectrum which has implications both for use and the design of mobile networks.
To really make life interesting, 5G also aims to enable private 5G RANs. For instance industry in some countries are heavily involved in building their own 5G networks for their own use in geographically limited areas (made possible by allocating higher frequency spectrum for these uses).
The customers that 5G targets isn't so much the consumer as government and industry. For instance by removing the need for building dedicated infrastructure for emergency, defense, law-enforcement, manufacturing etc. which would represent cost savings.
Part of the challenge of 5G is that regulatory authorities don't understand how 5G differs from what they are used to, so many places in the world (with eager lobbying from the telco industry) one will try to keep new players out of the market. (Of course, they might understand, but there may be "motivating factors" to cling to the status quo where spectrum is mostly allocated in large chunks at significant cost and with bureaucracy that ensures smaller players are kept out)
Fair point and you are probably right. However, this is getting them a ton of bad press from pretty major players in the privacy world (Edward Snowden for example). This has high chances of a lot of people abandoning Apple products (I'll no longer purchase new apple products and already switching over to de-googled Android).
Privacy is obviously just a marketing play by Apple but this time, they can't hide it and it might actually hurt their bottom line.
The second one is outdated - not only did the prosecutors drop the case against him for insufficient evidence, his situation led Germany to subsequently repeal the law against insulting foreign leaders. He received plenty of support, both from the public and from the public broadcaster on which he recited the controversial poem.
In many countries (including the US) there are circumstances where defamation law can create civil or criminal liability for such a claim, but yeah, usually not merely for stating it without certain other things also being true about the situation.
Conversely, there are cases in Germany where calling someone a Nazi would not lead to a fine. One very clear example:
Person A: [Unambiguously asserts a sincere adherence to Nazi ideology]
Person B: Did you hear that, everyone? Person A is a Nazi.
I'm not talking about defamation. I can understand why you would infer that. The fine I'm talking about is about "feeling insulted". There doesn't even have to be a third person present. Say someone treats you in a racist way, you call him Nazi, judge can order you to pay 400 Euros(or more depending how damaging he thinks you may have been to his feelings) for hurting his feelings. No need to have a witness prove it either. It's a purely subjective judgement.
You calling someone Nazi to shut down someone in public actually seems to work well to shut down public discourse judging from what I'm observing in Germany right now. I don't think those defamation lawsuits go anywhere(even though they should).
I was assaulted once and said this can only happen in a fascist country. The assaulter filed a complained saying I called him Nazi and I was fined for doing so, despite the fact that I never used those words. The law literally talks about this as something "hurting your honour". This law is ridiculous in its own right. It's not really related to the word Nazi at all. Which is why I called it a fun fact. It doesn't matter that I didn't say it. What matters is that the judge thought that I could have said it.
Attached is a case where someone appealed a judgement at the constitutional court of Germany because he was fined for calling a social worker in a correctional facility a "Trulla"[0]. Think of it as getting fined by the court for contempt by calling a random person a "Karen" in the US. He did say it, but it hardly constitutes an insult to someones honour. The courtcase argued that the way this law is currently used directly contradicts the rights of freedom of speech. Obviously they lost because it would set a precedent rendering this whole charade meaningless.
The way this law works is that it's undefined enough that what constitutes an insult to your honour and can therefore be used whenever someone threatens authority or if authority doesn't like you, you can be fined.
Not only in Russia. It's sad to see a country (in central europe) which puts a guy 8 years in jail for raping children more than 8 years, justifying such invazive software as defence against CP.
> 1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
The sad reality right now is that we're actively suggesting that peoples stop buying smart phones, and I think that would mean that any argument will fall on deaf ears. Yes, projects like the PinePhone exists, but they aren't ready for the general public.
As much as I agree with your comment, the sad reality is that I have to pick between Apple and Google. Of those two companies I still trust Apple significantly more.
Pixel phones + GrapheneOS/CalyxOS.
Various phones + LineageOS.
Various devices + SailfishOS.
Librem 5.
PinePhone.
Fairphone.
/e/.
F(x)Tec Pro1.
You're greatly underestimating the ability of people to adapt when suggiciently motivated, especially when so many devices can be bought fully set up and most people use only a few apps anyway.
There are lots of DIY electric car kits out there too, but suggesting one as a viable alternative daily driver to mass-market consumers seems a bit unrealistic.
Apple was nice in theory because it provided out-of-the-box privacy and security that laypeople could just go buy.
I think people need to wise up extreamly quickly to what we are facing here. I cannot overstate the importance of being extreamly sceptical of the motives of tech giants at this point in time.
I think the biggest challenge is a lack of consumer choice. Part of this is the complete failure of the FTC and the SEC in the 21st century. Maybe Pinephone will be compelling some day in the future but it isn't now. I don't want to be on tech support for my entire family trying to get some toy phone to work. We've built phones that are generally simple enough for a random grandma to do the couple things they need to do but the problem is to them FB, etc. IS the internet. That is where they see the pictures of their grandkids, they don't care about anything else.
I think there is a #4 that could be on the list. People within Apple could try to push back and protest and walk-out or any other means to try to make this fight go viral. However, the media and population write large will push back "... for the children." I've always thought that these problems are more solvable with Whistleblower Awards plus Witness Protection packages for the major enablers. There are lots of people in these rings or with someone who is but they are dependent on those same bad people for their necessities. Also, some of these rings are crime group adjacent and witnesses would need protection.
From what I'm reading, it seems like turning off iCloud (maybe just for photos?) will turn off this scanning. It is unclear to me what server side scanning Apple was/wasn't doing on photos uploaded to iCloud previously/currently. The one thing that occurred to me is that this is almost seems like this is a cya, Section 230 protection in disguise. There has been more discussions about Big Tech and 230, and this is one way to say "Look, we are compliant on our platform. Don't remove our protections or break us up, we are your friend!"
> 1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
This is impossible. Just like modern democratic voting, you don’t get to vote on an individual policy. You vote on a bundle and that bundle almost certainly includes policies (or in this case “features”) that you don’t agree with.
So? If a corporation (or political party) does a shockingly egregious thing that doesn't align with your values then you absolutely should switch to an alternative that supports your values.
The thing that gets me about #1 is that if I prefer iOS to Android, there is nothing that can replace iCloud. Google Photos and other apps cannot upload seamlessly in the background as iCloud can. I cannot “restore my iPhone” from a Google Drive backup. Apple uses private APIs for their own software to enable this, so now I must either use iCloud and accept these terms, or make iTunes backups regularly + deal with the inconvenient workarounds required to let things like Google Photos sync everything.
Given that there are two realistic choices in mobile OS these days, both bound to hardware (and update schedules to a combination of mfg + carrier whim), it’s not a great position to be in as a consumer. And yet, what is the alternative? PinePhone?
> 1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
As much as I dislike this invasion of privacy, I still trust Apple's products, ecosystem & stewardship over the alternatives (for use by whole family).
Although this is the first time in recent memory where not having a viable alternative to consider is irksome as I don't see where the negative push back will come from to prevent further user hostile invasions like this - can only hope it ends here and it's not the start of a slippery slope towards govt surveillance.
The problem with 1. is that a tiny amount of people understand or care about the issue. It won't make a difference to Apple bottom line. Then when other companies start doing it, you eventually become tech excluded.
"vote with your fit" is as ineffective as taking less showers. It is a non-solution (what helps is growing less food in a desert, aligning government with the needs of most people)
with regards to #1, that is what I did last year when I chose to buy apple since safetynet would mean i would be completely hosed in buying a phone that works with privacy centered custom roms while also using important apps. now that apple is completely breaking user trust where you you possibly think people can 'vote with their feet'? this is a libertarian fantasy other than simply not using smartphones altogether?
> 1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
Too bad many people have been trapped within the Apple bubble and are unable to jump ship because they have no idea how the rest works, how they get their data over there and don't have the time to do all this.
This is why Apple IS a monopolist and this is how it ends up being a problem.
That would be fine except an informed choice depends on accurate information, and this letter starts off saying things that are patently false.
“ Apple's proposed technology works by continuously monitoring photos saved or shared on the user's iPhone, iPad, or Mac. ”
No it doesn’t, photos just saved in the phone are never scanned by either of the systems Apple is implementing, and shared photos are only scanned in two very specific situations.
Also they avoid pointing out the iMessage aspect of this is opt in only, so it only applies to children and only if parents choose to enable it, and it's off by default.
You can completely avoid all scanning entirely by not opting in children for the iMesage scan, which is irrelevant to you if you don’t have children anyway, and not using iCloud Photo Library. Photos you keep on your phone or share using other services will not be scanned. Anyone just reading this letter wouldn't know any of that. How is this promoting informed choice?
Bear in mind the iCloud Photo Library scan is being implemented in order to meet a legal obligation. Apple is required by law to scan photos uploaded to their cloud service.
So really there are two issues here. One is the question of parental authority over optionally enabling the scan for their children’s use of iMessage. That's a legitimate concern over the privacy of children, no question.
The other is whether this is an appropriate way for Apple to comply with US law requiring scanning of uploaded images, and whether that law is appropriate. Again, entirely legitimate concerns that this letter obfuscates completely.
Probably the main issue is that every time a technology or regulation that starts like that (“you don’t need to worry if you’re not doing anything wrong”) is then inevitably expanded into repressive activities by governments around the world.
Oh absolutely, the laws that started all of this are terribly thought through, all a child pornographer has to do to avoid these controls is not use iCloud Photo Library. That's it, just do that and they can have as much child porn on their phones as they like, and share it however they like using iMessage or anything else.
> all a child pornographer has to do to avoid these controls is not use iCloud Photo Library
Yes, so as it is today, this system isn't even useful for its stated purpose. Apple are not so stupid that they don't know that. Either it will not always be as it is today, or the stated original purpose isn't the ultimate purpose.
After all, the problem you state has a simple and obvious solution: just scan everything on the device.
The only saving grace is that a full database of copyright material won't fit on a current device, so as long as you avoid offending people in power in your jurisdiction you're probably fine for a few years.
Or maybe be they are just doing what they said they are doing for the reasons they gave, to comply with the law, and that’s that. But apparently that not even a possibility you can conceive of.
Just be warned, there will be those that unfairly try to cast this as helping the distribution of CP. Expect a headline tomorrow: "Edward Snowden et al Supports Child Porn" - or some other hot take.
A few other things:
1. Vote with your feet - Put your money in the pockets of the people aligned to your values.
2. Actively support projects you align with - If you use some open source hardware/software, try to help out (financially or time).
3. Make others aware - Reach out to those around you and inform them, only then they can make an informed choice themselves.