I think I'd adopt the posture and attitude of George GallowayHow would you appear while testifying to Congress?
I think I'd adopt the posture and attitude of George GallowayHow would you appear while testifying to Congress?
The article on this very website says that rumor is quite unlikely, but people keep promoting it anyway.Well the as per the link, one of the more salacious rumours go that they scrapped the redesigned line ~ a month ago and scrambled to release anything they could with the same current tooling, hence no release date and everything is exactly the same except a slightly different screen that warps the image at the edges.
The common feature is loss of confidential information, and having a choice about between foregoing a facility (iCloud photos, Apple workers' online sessions) that should be private or using the facility and potentially losing confidentiality.It's also a false equivalence, not least because Apple is only scanning photos which were destined to be uploaded to iCloud, which would still have been scanned at the end of the day. So if you have no qualms about having your photos in your iCloud photo library account being scanned for child pornography, it really isn't any different from having said photos scanned on device as a precursor to being uploaded to iCloud. It's the same outcome either way.
if you don't want your images being subject to human review, then don't upload them to iCloud. Nothing's changed. If anything, the system being proposed by Apple is actually more private.
I fail to see any corollary between the two scenarios you cited.
You do not know what the odds are and neither does Apple. Not sure where you got the estimate of 1 in a trillion, but no doubt it is based on the assumption of statistical independence of errors, which won't apply if people take series of similar photos. Moreover, it is how this system could be abused or used as a blueprint for surveillance by authoritarian regimes that I worry about.So I take it you tacitly agree it's not surveillance since you've now jumped to another point. If you're concerned about the "less than 1 in 1 trillion" chance that your account will be have 30 or more false positives, then I suggest you not use iCloud for photos. It's an absolutely absurd thing to worry about to be honest.
How privileged this reads. While it’s nice you can hang out with friends and relatives, many of mine live 2500 miles away, and FaceTime and iMessage are godsends. Nice that when you call for a cab they actually came. For a lot of people that wasn’t the case. Nor did you know the price ahead of time, nor could you get a black car for the price of what cab rides used to cost. Garmin and TomTom were never as good as iPhone apps, so that’s just silly. Nice that you can afford a car. And one with a nav system! Good for you. Not everyone can. And I suppose yours are internet connected (like your Garmin and tomtom) so they are always up to date, you can search them for any business, etc. Nice.
Nice that you live in a place where you could buy any newspaper in the world or watch any tv station. And your newspapers were instantly updated when news events happened, and the new publication showed up immediately! And the newspaper delivery person followed you around and handed a paper to you as soon as you wanted one! That’s great!
I mean, why not end with “these young whippersnappers with their silly technology, missing the joy of their daily ablutions” while you’re at it.
To be fair to the notion of products that make people’s lives better: a car-based GPS was never going to work out for me. They aren’t live data, they need frequent costly updates, or can’t be updated.While those products are indeed great, I don't think they make the world any better; quite the contrary. I think the world was better when people used to live in the real world, to notice and enjoy the real world, to hang out with friends and relatives, rather than being just a bunch of zombies, impervious to everything around them, immersed in games and social media sites from dawn till dusk, addicted to their mobile phones like junkies to their shots.
Summon a car via an iOS app? Sure, it's nice, but it's not like making a phone call to accomplish the same thing would be such a major problem. We've been doing it for decades and didn't mind it.
Navigation directions? Yes, they're nice, but a Garmin, or TomTom, or the native navi system of a car, do it much better than an iPhone, so we don't realy owe Apple too much in this respect. Not to mention that Apple Maps are an absolute and total crap outside US, and for a long time they used to be crap in the US as well.
Read the latest news? I don't think reading a newspaper or watching TV was a big problem back in the days when we didn't have the internet. Besides, if you want to read them in electronic format, a computer is a much better and more comfortable tool for this task than an iPhone. It's not like we owe this to Apple; after all, the latest news used to be on the internet even before 2007.
Watch any movie or TV show? Yes, it's nice, but again, it's not like Apple has invented the wheel here. Apple TV has come quite late to the party, if my memory serves. Besides, I don't think it made the world better. Just lazier. I think the world was a bit nicer when we used to go out with our friends to watch a movie or a play, rather than watching it on an iPad in our bedroom.
I'll give you that Apple products are great, that they're the best in their field - which is why I also use them myself, but whether the world is better thanks to them... no, I don't think it is.
Maybe, but that's no reason not to do it right, i.e. to match colours and to tie his necktie properly. Either you wear a suit and tie properly, or you give up and just wear a sweater instead. A suit that's worn sloppily looks even worse than no suit at all.
Come on, give me a break. You live in the most privileged country on Earth - and in one of the wealthiest of its states at that, so you're in no position to lecture me on privilege.
Yes, I can afford a car (what do you know, an American one, no less), I can buy a newspaper, and I've got friends. Lucky me. I'm not ashamed of that.
After all, everyone on this forum is privileged, because it means they have internet access, and they own an Apple device.
We are all privileged here. This is a forum for privileged people. So, please, spare me this Marxist baloney.
Besides, I don't think you've ever used a Garmin or another high-end navigation device, because you're plain wrong. Apple Maps cannot hold a candle, not even by far, to a Garmin. I've got just a fairly inexpensive Garmin device, not top of the line, which is five or six years old, and which still blows the iPhone out of the water. And let's not forget that Apple Maps is only really useable in the US, so it's not much use to unprivileged people. Thank God for Google Maps. In this respect, it's Google who made the world better for unprivileged people, not Apple.
You do not know what the odds are and neither does Apple. Not sure where you got the estimate of 1 in a trillion, but no doubt it is based on the assumption of statistical independence of errors, which won't apply if people take series of similar photos. Moreover, it is how this system could be abused or used as a blueprint for surveillance by authoritarian regimes that I worry about.
It's also a false equivalence, not least because Apple is only scanning photos which were destined to be uploaded to iCloud, which would still have been scanned at the end of the day. So if you have no qualms about having your photos in your iCloud photo library account being scanned for child pornography, it really isn't any different from having said photos scanned on device as a precursor to being uploaded to iCloud. It's the same outcome either way.
if you don't want your images being subject to human review, then don't upload them to iCloud. Nothing's changed. If anything, the system being proposed by Apple is actually more private.
I fail to see any corollary between the two scenarios you cited.
Couldn't, couldn’t! I’ll go fix that. Thanks for catching that. 😀If they could care less then why wouldn’t they?
I may have misunderstood. Sorry about that.I admit that I am privileged. I didn‘t lecture you on privilege - I just pointed out how privileged one has to be to say the things your wrote.
It's like 2,000 spoons when all you need is a knife.A little too ironic, this.
Yes, that was my point. It’s mostly likely that the S7 chip is an identical S6 chip rebranded with a S7 marking, since Apple didn’t mention anything at all about chip improvements during the keynote."Nonetheless, MacRumors can confirm several details about the Series 7 not currently shared by Apple. First, the Apple Watch Series 7 is indeed powered with an S7 branded chip." That's not speculation.
The Watch launch is weird this year, no doubt. But it can just as easily be explained by production difficulties with this model as by difficulties with a completely unsubstantiated "flat sides" design.
The idea that Apple fears the competition financially is laughable. In each of the markets you mention, Apple has a virtual monopoly on the profits, while competitors flood the cheap end of the market with crap. The only competitors that have been able to put out relatively decent hardware have other streams of revenue: Microsoft makes money from software licenses and Xbox and it throws is at the surface line to try to compete with Apple, without managing. They even bought iJustine! Samsung uses cash from panel sales and washing machines to try to put out nice expensive phones, and they flop. Apple has a monopoly of high end stuff. I think the competition is pretty irrelevant at this point.
I did read the Apple literature as well as some of the technical literature. I am a researcher who has been following the AI literature since back-propagation algorithms in the 1980's. The system will produce false positives. The result of that can be a human review of the photographs. And I do not trust the 1 in trillion statistic cited by Apple for multiple reasons. For one thing, given odds per year presumes a certain number of photos per year, and I suspect there are many other assumptions as well that go into that estimate. Moreover, they will not know the odds until they fully deploy the system, which means we become one giant experiment in surveillance.It appears you've been reading more secondary sources than primary, which would explain why you don't seem to understand the proposed process:
View attachment 1841919![]()
I'm sure you're just going to downplay that as a "guess" (even though Apple clearly presents it as an accurate, informed number) but even if that were a guess AND were a thousand times off, that's still 1 in 1 billion. I'm also having hard time seeing how someone is going to take an innocent photo (or a series of them that are similar) that matches the digital fingerprint of a known CSAM image.
I also think your worry about Apple going rogue and hand over access to the system to abusive governments is really out there. As I've said in other threads on the topic, just because something's possible doesn't mean you should worry about it. Technically, my parents could have me murdered, yet I don't give that a second thought. Same for Apple abusing this technology (or allowing it to be abused).
I did read the Apple literature as well as some of the technical literature. I am a researcher who has been following the AI literature since back-propagation algorithms in the 1980's. The system will produce false positives. The result of that can be a human review of the photographs. And I do not trust the 1 in trillion statistic cited by Apple for multiple reasons. For one thing, given odds per year presumes a certain number of photos per year, and I suspect there are many other assumptions as well that go into that estimate. Moreover, they will not know the odds until they fully deploy the system, which means we become one goat experiment in surveillance.
Except if you are keeping it a secret and doing it on a massive scale than it looks a hell of a lot more like a recall worthy hardware defect you sweep under the rug while saying “well, onto the next device”.Yes, I believe that is a true statement.
Yes, I believe it is true that having your phone operate no matter what the condition of the battery, is better than the alternative of having the phone shut down. Upgrading is a personal decision and hopefully the person will give their phone to Apple for recycling.
We’ll no. I had a phone that was part of the power management “scandal”. This “sneaking it in” didn’t bother me and apple replaced the battery. I did not get a “generous offer” to upgrade to the next device.Except if you are keeping it a secret and doing it on a massive scale than it looks a hell of a lot more like a recall worthy hardware defect you sweep under the rug while saying “well, onto the next device”.
I remember his appearance. It was wonderful. I have to check to see if it is on YouTube.I think I'd adopt the posture and attitude of George Galloway![]()