Exactly. Or when Facebook promised you'd never need a Facebook account to use an Oculus. They've shown over and over again they'll do whatever increases their market power and revenues.
That's what I find so disappointing about Apple. They were the one large tech player that had begun to build their brand on taking privacy seriously.
> They were the one large tech player that had begun to build their brand on taking privacy seriously.
"Brand" is right, because it always was, and always will be marketing and nothing more (unless maybe laws are changed and/or regulators get off their lazy asses).
Apple have built their brand on more than privacy -> they are doing privacy / trust / security etc.
I think you may find that folks don't take as dim a view on preventing exploitation of children as HN crowd. Apple has arguably the #3 to #1 brand globally currently.
Let's give this some time to shake out and see how the android brands and others do (if they become the home of child exploitation and porn) brand wise.
I think you may find that folks don't take as dim a view on preventing exploitation of children as HN crowd. ... (if they become the home of child exploitation and porn)
The parent comment is anything but 'bull'. To date, every single messenger app with E2E encryption has wound up becoming popular with unsavory groups like ISIS, Atomwoffen, organized criminals, etc.
While I'm personally uncomfortable with the privacy ramifications of what Apple is doing, Apple's decision is sensible in the grand scheme.
That means you need to scan everyones photos and read everyones messages, because someone might be saying something bad somewhere?
They'll move elsewhere, and millions of people will lose their privacy forever, and some will get killed, because they'll save a wrong kind of meme, and the local dictator will mark that hash as "bad".
There's basically three approaches a company that implements E2EE can take:
1. Anything-goes. Accept that customers will use it for evil and for good, and justify allowing the former by the latter.
2. Lie to customers. Eg: include a backdoor for law-enforcement.
3. On-device detection of illegal or dangerous content (as Apple is apparently doing)
Regardless of whether approach #1 has merit, I don't see any large company staying with it long term because it's a PR nightmare. No big company wants to have an endless stream of stomach-turning stories in the news. It's easy to predict headlines like "Breaking! World's Largest Human Trafficking Ring Conducts Slave Auctions on Apple Messages. Tim Cook Silent!"
I can call someone using a phone, tell him "bring two pair of blue trousers and one shirt, and don't forget the bullets for the trousers", and noone will ever blame the phone company for me arranging some illegal deal/stuff. I can sell drugs in the McDonalds parking lot, and noone will blame McDonalds for it. I can take a cab to future crime scene, and noone blames the taxi... or a bus.. or a plane. I can use many of the ISPs to educate myself how to get rid of a body or make a bomb or whatever, and noone blames Verizon. I can buy a polariod to make illegal photos, or canon or nikon or whatever, and noone blames them. I can operate an illegal business from a hotel room, and noone blames the hotel. I can even send an encrypted printed out message, and noone blames the post office. I can pimp out prostitutes on ikea beds, and noone blames ikea.
This is just another case of governments wanting to snoop on their people, and companies letting them,.... and for good PR they just pack it around child abuse and terrorism.
There's actually another approach - no E2EE. Period.
Do folks really think AWS keys in china are not under control of govt?
Do folks really think MMS and other messaging in things like tiktok between chinese users is not accessible by govt?
Zoom?
Normal phone calls?
Folks understand that apple data centers will be run by state-owned Guizhou-Cloud Big Data Industry (GCBD). That Apple has had to agree to keep the encryption keys locally to those data centers under control of GCBD employees? Why would apple have to change how it does encryption for chinese users and make sure keys are locally available.
Make an actual argument. HN is getting a bit pathetic. Address the issues / topics raised.
What content does your comment add? Nothing.
I am pointing out that there already are efforts around total encrypted privacy. Tor network is doing it. So are others. As they are taken over by bad actors - the rest of the world starts cutting them off and blocking them.
When folks talk about this hurting apples brand - you could not be more wrong. Seriously, address the points I'm making.
Apple is currently providing relatively strong E2E encryption (a leader actually in that). They are now going to match that with screening on probably the #1 issue that is out there around encrypted networks, the issue that often forces folks to backdoor things.
They also are going to be offering what seem like thoughtful features for users. Parents in particular with kids accounts have concerns (reasonable) about tech - and they will help to address that.
For all the "brand damage" HN goes on about here, in the larger world this may be popular and or very accepted.
And yes, if android becomes known as the home of the pedo's - that's not going to be an apple brand problem, but an android one. Surprisingly often we've seen others COPY apple, usually after loudly pointing out that they won't.
Make an actual argument. HN is getting a bit pathetic.
Did you make an actual argument? What's pathetic is accusing anyone who disagrees with you of supporting child exploitation. None of the people I care about who were victims of some kind of abuse would have been helped by having spyware on phones. I don't make a habit of swearing on HN, nor of engaging with people who argue and accuse in bad faith, so I'll leave it at that.
That's what I find so disappointing about Apple. They were the one large tech player that had begun to build their brand on taking privacy seriously.