Comment by etempleton | Hacker News Reader

Comment by etempleton | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Something probably did happen. Apple no doubt became increasingly aware of just how legally culpable they are for photos uploaded to iCloud.

For content that is pirated Apple would receive a slap on the wrist, but for content that shows the exploitation of children? And that Apple is hosting on their owned servers? There is no doubt every government will throw their full legal weight behind that case.

Now they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Do they or do they not look at iCloud Photos? Well, not in the cloud i guess, but right before you upload them. Is that any better? I don't know? Probably not. They really have no choice though. They either scan in the cloud of scan on the device. Scanning in the cloud would at least let people know where their content truly stands, but then they can't advertise end-to-end encryption and on paper it may have felt like a bigger reversal.

I think the long and short answer is. Apple cannot really legally protect your privacy when it comes to data stored on their servers. The end.

I doubt a judge can find apple liable for hosting encrypted data if its illegal. That would mean every e2e storage solution, or even just encryption and storing files on a s3 bucket host would be liable.

Apple should use it's gigantic legal arm to set good precedents for privacy in court.

First, there is nothing stopping a full legislative assault on end to end encryption, various such proposals have had traction recently in both the US and EU.

The lawyerly phrase is “knew or should have known.” It could be argued that now that this technology is feasible, failure to apply it is complicity.

Think about GDPR. Eventually homomorphic encryption is going to be at a point where “we need your data in the clear so we can do computations with it on the server” will cross from “failure to be on the bleeding edge of privacy research” to “careless and backwards.”

The way to win that situation is to not play.

Pull all apple products from the shelves for a month and launch a billion dollar ad campaign about what the hell our government is up too.

At least try to stick to one governments. Tech companies are entering tricky waters by trying to follow laws of many nations (which conflict) simply because their customers are there

> First, there is nothing stopping a full legislative assault on end to end encryption, various such proposals have had traction recently in both the US and EU.

And nothing stops Apple from fighting against the legislative assault. They have made themselves a champion of user privacy and have deep pockets to fight the fight, yet they just surrender at first attempt.

> champion of user privacy

> surrender at first attempt

The irony

They could just keep scanning the data stored on their servers like everyone else does (Google, Etc) and leave it at that.

Then grow a pair and point at government influence. Leak DOJ demand letters. Do something to indicate this was forced on them. Or is a gag order in place? That’s my bet right now.

Yea, I agree. I see so many comments where people view the issue is black and white and that apple is clearly in the wrong. Yes, privacy is a great ideal. There are absolute monsters in this world and there is zero chance that no apple employees have brushed up against those monsters. I would ask that every single developer step back and think about putting themselves into a situation where software that you write is being used by monsters to horribly scar children around the world and ask yourself what you would do. Saying the moral and right thing to do is to protect the privacy of all of your users including those monsters just cannot be done if you are not a sociopath that only cares about profits and has glimpsed the horror that is out there. Fuck if I would write any code that would make it easier for those monsters to exist or turn a blind eye towards it. It may be a slippery privacy slope but I don't see how people that have glimpsed the horror would be able to sleep at night without stepping out on that slope.

Easy.

When I was young, I was not effectively spied on. My activity and digital trail were ephemeral, and hard to pin down. i wasn't the subkect of constant analysis and scrutiny. I had the privilege of being invited into the engine of an idling train to share an Engineer's drinks along with my parents and no one batted an eye.

There were pedophiles then too. guess what? We didn't sacrifice everyone's right to privacy. We didn't lock more and more rights out of the reach of minors. You didn't need a damn college degree and an insane amount of idealistic commitment to opt out of the surveillance machine. I could fill most prescriptions, even out of State.

We didn't fear the monster. They were hunted with everything we could justify mustering, but you weren't treated as one by default.

I imagine that maybe, somehow, tomorrow's youth may get to experience that. Not live in fear, but in appreciation of the fact that we too, looked into things absolutely worth being afraid of, but resisted the temptation to surrender yet more liberties for the promise of a safety that will never manifest. Just change its stripes.

Those are the best nights.

Actually, as long as the monsters are powerful and connected, they are well-protected, then and now.

> We didn't sacrifice everyone's right to privacy. We didn't lock more and more rights out of the reach of minors.

No. My elders and society just denied the monsters existed. And punished any one who talked about it.

I think there will always be a small number bad people in the world, that will always find a way to be bad.

I know they’re out there in the world, but I leave my home anyways, because living my entire life curled up in my bed in fear would be a sad and short life.

I’m more afraid that people will lose the ability to be happy because they’re so full of fear and skepticism that they don’t form meaningful relationships, relax, experience life.

I’m also more afraid of what can happen when a small group of people are allowed to dictate and control the lives of many, justifying it by pushing fear. Then it’ll be more than a small group of abusers harming a small group of people (in this case, child abusers). It becomes a different group of abusers (dictators) harming the entire population through their dystopian politics.

How many people, including children, died when a group of dictators used fear & skepticism in the 1930s to push an agenda that ultimately led to WWII and concentration camps?

We need to be extraordinarily careful that we don’t try to save a very small number of lives at the expense of many lives in the future, as a result of policies that we put in place today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com