| > don't build things at the edge of the pit where the handrail is a pinky promise not to let others push you. People are afraid, that the use of these tools are expanded in secret (hidden) for more than they should. From that point of view, legislation motives and discussion does not matter, because capability is valid for many tools at any moment, hence same speculation has applied before. However, if you want to apply surveillance publicly, then we indeed need legal base for pushing specified tools as mandatory. To expand it for more than CSAM, it will be quite slow process, and implementing something like that publicly before legal base is path for descruction for any company, because people can change for other company. Is Apple now making that legal process faster? While it feels like Apple is now closer to the edge of the pit, from techical perpective there is no difference yet. Tools have existed and system is closed source.
Question is still the same; ”would you spy for us”? I don’t think that answer has changed from Apple because they changed the location of the image scan. So, the question is, will legislation change towards more surveillance. Whatever the result is, I think it would have happened whether Apple added this feature or not, as it is not morale excuse. People find the way. In China, it is simply illegal to not install some app by muslims. |