An even better question is with all the reported incidents by FB, Google, DB, MS, etc… how many result in prosecution?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Delays Rollout of Controversial Child Safety Features to Make Improvements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
An even better question is with all the reported incidents by FB, Google, DB, MS, etc… how many result in prosecution?
I still find the Siri thing murky, I’ve read the law suits and have read what Apple has said, they don’t really square, if the issue is inadvertent Siri activations then I’m pretty comfortable leaving it active but there seems to be misinformation related to targeted ads or always listening that I don’t think is going on…. Could be wrong… just stating it’s unclear to me what the truth is….. I do understand what Alexis does though, it is always listening and is part of the reason it’s more responsive than Siri…predictive response a.I. Is a big advantage but also nefarious which was suppose to be the reason Apple decided not to go there
Hey, Apple. Want to do some good without infringing privacy? Make iPhones disable themselves when moving over 10 MPH. Cell phone usage behind the wheel does orders of magnitudes more carnage than drunk driving.
Don’t do any reporting, just “IPhone is disabled” if moving above 10 MPH on a road. All on-device.
Except for hands-free phone use?
One fly in that ointment: Passengers. Particularly passengers on mass transit. Though, admittedly, many wouldn't mind seeing mobile devices completely disabled on mass transit
Our iPhones are integrated into our car's sound system and legal to be used even when being the driver.
That is certainly true for voice and ringtones. Web use and mail are okay.
Though, admittedly, many wouldn't mind seeing mobile devices completely disabled on mass transit
That is certainly true for voice and ringtones. Web use and mail are okay.
I think if you think of it as a jurist you might be hard pressed to convict someone on cloud content alone, it seems to me any lawyer could create a reasonable doubt, however once a tech company reports it you would think it simply creates probable cause to get a search warrant…. It seems likely to me that if someone were guilty they would have other evidence discovered in their Home….so if law enforcement does their job I imagine the conviction rate would be high….. but if they find nothing during the search I think that would raise red flags that something else is going on and they were falsely accused….. just my opinion….. it seems to me the Apple hash thing may have made it easier to prosecute solely on the iCloud data due to it being directly tied back to the device which kinda suggest the government was involved in this…. But that just speculation and devolves in to the conspiracy thing quickly.
I don't drive, but I do use buses and trains. Apple already refuses to unlock iPhones if you are moving at car speeds, until you override it. For me, that's a PITA, but I understand it. Disabling the phone I would not understand.
Why? What do you care if somebody is playing Solitaire? What should happen on mass transit is volume-limiting....
One fly in that ointment: Passengers. Particularly passengers on mass transit. Though, admittedly, many wouldn't mind seeing mobile devices completely disabled on mass transit
Mind you I feel the same way about limiting music on construction sites. I had to listen to a construction worker near my office singing "La Bamba" 25 working days in a row from 8AM-4PM.
They do? I'm not often a passenger, so perhaps I just missed it? But the only times I've ever seen my phone balk is when it's connected to the Uconnect system in my Jeep.
huh, you are saying apple *isn’t* going to remove the code and the database that allows them to do this ?
i assume they are, they can re-insert it with a simple update so why wouldn’t they pull it as they are implying that they will ?
Yes. At least in the UK, where I currently live. I do understand the reason and I support it. It requires pushing a button on the lock screen that says literally "I'm not driving", then it allows access to the phone. The problem is that on a single bus trip I might have to do this multiple times if the bus stops and starts, as they tend to do. I just wish they would offer a button that says "I never drive" that would disable the feature and log your name on a database that can be accessed by the government if you are behind the wheel and suspected of being at fault in an accident. The authorities could then establish whether you disabled the safety feature, which presumably would have implications for the seriousness of any charges and the resulting sentences. In contrast to CSAM scanning, at least for this scheme there would at least be some sort of suspected crime before the snooping starts.
Just to be fair, we have at least two simple options:
a) stop using iCloud Photos, or
b) not upgrade to iOS 15
However, if we think about it a bit more, the system Apple was proposing is not very fit for purpose, as for an alarm to be triggered, it needs to find at least 30 CSAM hashed images. What if a predator only has 25 of those? Then it was not even mentioned at WWDC, so something big must have happened in Apple-land between June and August. 🤷🏻♂️
Last edited:
Or to be more succinct, chose (1) surveillance or (2) crippling features and security updates.
Yeah, that's what I get when my phone is linked to the system in my Jeep. I don't recall seeing it otherwise.
I understand your point, and your annoyance, but you know what the airheads that absolutely cannot stand to be separated from their social media umbilical cords would do, right? They'd turn that sucker off every single time, without a second thought. You're talking idiots with no more sense than to text while driving in the first place. Damn near had some ditz rear-end me, one afternoon, doing that. She almost drove into a lake, avoiding doing so.
Hey, Abazigal, now that you're an official 'contributor' to MacRumors, is it good form to make posts like this?Goodbye.
Unless the idea is your 'contribution' is supposed to be passive-agressive responses to people.... hmmm
@crymimefireworks
Last edited:
Yes, always a good idea. Make a bad decision? Headed for chaos & destructive consequences? Just plow ahead anyway, never change course and never admit you acted hastily or were wrong or the information you’re operating on has improved. Truly excellent leadership. From icebergs to Iraq, how to ignore reality and ram your ship, company, or nation straight into the ground to maintain your prideful ego up til the instant everyone dies. …then blame those who tried to head off the disaster early for getting in your way. It’s practically The American Way at this point.
a couple of years ago, I remember getting my bag searched when I left a retail clothes store. I have never stolen anything in my life.
sure they could check my bag ..and indeed found nothing...but that search alone was enough for me to NEVER return to that store
...or to put it more plainly, the store thought that I might be a thief.
that presumption was offensive....as is the CSAM photo scanning on my device.
good luck Apple if you want to treat your customers that way.
sure they could check my bag ..and indeed found nothing...but that search alone was enough for me to NEVER return to that store
...or to put it more plainly, the store thought that I might be a thief.
that presumption was offensive....as is the CSAM photo scanning on my device.
good luck Apple if you want to treat your customers that way.
Only problem is, that Apple has to program, and - ahem - TEST the software BEFORE releasing it to the unsuspecting public.
Would you be surprised, if the update iOS xx.1 to iOS xx introducing the new feature suddenly introduces an ooops feature, where the phone is turned off, when not moved. And the programmer, trying to think for himself, also introduced an new order of value, so that the iPhone disabled suddenly happened BELOW 100 mph, and you needed to move ABOVE 100 mph, in order to even upgrade to the hastily released iOS xx.1.1, which restored sane values again (disabling iOS only above 1000 mph, to be absolutely sure, that no unintended side effects... he... where have I heard a similar approach to real life... it would have been easier to remove the "feature", but that's not the standard Apple approach ;-)
Would you really be surprised?
Smile.
In the future if that ever happens again, tell them they cannot search but if they want to call the cops to search go for it. Then request a report from the cops when they find nothing.
Start from the top and do away with corrupt law enforcement:
FBI agent arrested for crimes against children
The Franklin County Sheriff’s Office says an arrest warrant has been issued for an FBI agent on a slew of criminal charges, including sexual battery.
Not sure how Apple would do thatStart from the top and do away with corrupt law enforcement:
FBI agent arrested for crimes against children
The Franklin County Sheriff’s Office says an arrest warrant has been issued for an FBI agent on a slew of criminal charges, including sexual battery.www.msn.com
Child abuses and predators have clear and obvious links in the politicians and religious elite circles since way back when, but nothing is being done. Apple coming out high and mighty and saying that all iPhone users in the world to be the potential predators instead is downright offensive. It is clear that the CP stuff is just a ruse, and there's underlying intent for implementing a worldwide mass scanning system.Start from the top and do away with corrupt law enforcement:
FBI agent arrested for crimes against children
The Franklin County Sheriff’s Office says an arrest warrant has been issued for an FBI agent on a slew of criminal charges, including sexual battery.
Just *CANCEL* this useless feature and keep our devices private.
I respect this take a lot. Apple assumed I'm a criminal after being a lifelong user. That alone is enough for me to never user their devices again.
I think I have to disagree.
A parents job is to get a kid ready for the world. By age 8 or so, a child should be trusted enough to access the internet on their own. Prior to this, there should have been conversations with the child about ramifications of doing bad things on the internet, and how things we do now can affect you years or decades down the road.
But just like a parent may tell a child not to play in certain parts of town because they are dangerous, kids will sometimes break the rules and still play. Just because you allow your child to be on the internet, doesn’t mean that you don’t want to know if they are doing things that are wrong (which they might not see as potentially harmful).