On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
(in article<news:170920212024015207%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
> one could claim ignorance, except that you've been told that they're
> false and with extensive proof, yet you continue to say the same
> things, thereby making it deliberate intentional lies.

Why is it that they are describing themselves in almost every message now?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On 9/17/2021 5:57 PM, RonTheGuy wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
> (in article<news:170920212024015207%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>> one could claim ignorance, except that you've been told that they're
>> false and with extensive proof, yet you continue to say the same
>> things, thereby making it deliberate intentional lies.
>
> Why is it that they are describing themselves in almost every message now?

"The worst waste of time is arguing with the fool and fanatic who
doesn't care about truth or reality, but only the victory of his beliefs
and illusions. Never waste time on discussions that make no sense...
There are people who for all the evidence presented to them, do not have
the ability to understand, and others who are blinded by ego, hatred and
resentment, and the only thing that they want is to be right even if
they aren’t."

"When ignorance screams, intelligence shuts up. Your peace and
tranquility are worth more."

Stop arguing with fools. Filter them out like most of us already do.

<https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/story-donkey-tiger-akhilesh-sengar/>.

In article <1mfxbie55rbar$.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
<ron@null.invalid> wrote:

> Do you at least now understand Apple released both campaigns simultaneously?

that was never in dispute.

> Ron, the most dishonest guy in town.

ftfy

you keep moving the goalposts each time you're shown to be wrong.

In article <deoxf2etqlmu$.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
<ron@null.invalid> wrote:

> > you asked a question and i gave an extensive answer which showed you to
> > be wrong, which you snipped and continued attacking.
>
> How does you agreeing with Jobs (as I said you would) "prove me wrong?"

reread the part you snipped where i proved you wrong and stop twisting
what was said to deny it.

if you prefer, i can prove you wrong even more.

it's up to you.

In article <si3epa$4ch$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> There are people who for all the evidence presented to them, do not have
> the ability to understand,

you being the best example of that

On Sep 18, 2021, nospam wrote
(in article<news:170920212127333870%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>> How does you agreeing with Jobs (as I said you would) "prove me wrong?"
>
> reread the part you snipped where i proved you wrong and stop twisting
> what was said to deny it.

I said you'd agree with Jobs and you agreed with Jobs.
How is that somehow in your mind that makes me wrong?

You don't even make any sense to yourself.
This is it.

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
(in article<news:170920212127313791%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>> Do you at least now understand Apple released both campaigns simultaneously?
>
> that was never in dispute.

Read the quote you snipped out from Lewis who also disputed it as you did.

On Sep 17, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnsk8f3v.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> And once again, you show your total ignorance of the Messages system
> which has NOTHING to do with the CSAM system at all

Now you're not even making sense to yourself.
With that I'm going to cut the cord.

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

In article <54kg0heh43rv.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
<ron@null.invalid> wrote:

> >> Do you at least now understand Apple released both campaigns
> >> simultaneously?
> >
> > that was never in dispute.
>
> Read the quote you snipped out from Lewis who also disputed it as you did.
>
> On Sep 17, 2021, Lewis wrote
> (in article<news:slrnsk8f3v.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> > And once again, you show your total ignorance of the Messages system
> > which has NOTHING to do with the CSAM system at all

he is correct.

they are two separate systems, along with a third that was about siri,
all of which were released at the same time, something which not a
single person has disputed.

you are desperate.

> Now you're not even making sense to yourself.

more bullshit.

> With that I'm going to cut the cord.

wise move on your part.

> Ron, the trolliest guy in town.

ftfy

On 2021-09-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnska0fu.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>, Lewis
><g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>> > * only vouchers that are reviewed and verified by a human being to
>> > be actual child abuse material are forwarded to authorities
>>
>> And the images that are viewed by an Apple employee are NOT the CSAM
>> images, nor the user's image. They are VERY low resolution versions
>> that are just enough that a human can tell there is probably a match
>> (or not).
>
> that brings up a very interesting legal question for which i've not
> yet seen a good answer.
>
> what amount (and type) of degradation is sufficient such that a
> illegal image is no longer considered illegal, yet still recognizable
> so that it can accurately be matched to an actual illegal csam image?
>
> i've seen all sorts of speculation, but nothing that is particularly
> convincing.

All we know is that the secure safety vouchers contain a "visual
derivative" of the original photo. It wouldn't be all that hard to have
AI trained to obscure sensitive portions of he human anatomy in a given
photo. And I suspect that's exactly what Apple is doing.

> presumably apple has a very good answer, but i've yet to see it.

I doubt anyone outside of Apple will actually see it. But I have little
doubt Apple can and will do it in a way that preserves privacy by
obscuring sensitive portions of potential matches.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2021-09-18, RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
> (in article<news:170920212012535114%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>>> How can you still be unaware of everything all the experts have said?
>>
>> logical fallacy.
>
> What do you gain

Sanity.

Meanwhile your fear-driven world is based on the opposite.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2021-09-18, RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
>> (in article<news:170920212012535114%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>>>> How can you still be unaware of everything all the experts have said?
>>>
>>> logical fallacy.
>>
>> What do you gain
>
> Sanity.
>
> Meanwhile your fear-driven world is based on the opposite.
>
Why has this thread become so popular? It like hijacked my phone. Arlen?

Am 18.09.21 um 02:40 schrieb RonTheGuy:
> On Sep 17, 2021, nospam wrote
> (in article<news:170920212012535114%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>>> How can you still be unaware of everything all the experts have said?
>>
>> logical fallacy.
>
> What do you gain by calling a hundred different privacy organizations wrong?

Permanent smart ass-mode. Also a kind of a backdoor ... *SCNR*

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 18.09.21 um 02:42 schrieb RonTheGuy:
> On Sep 17, 2021, sms wrote
>> Yes, that's the precise concern of human rights groups, child advocates,
>> the LGBTQ+ community, and privacy advocates.
>
> What does nospam gain by saying everyone who disagrees with Apple is wrong?

Call Apple and find out what this paid agent-provocateur gets per post.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 18/09/2021 at 01:07, RonTheGuy wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, Jolly Roger wrote
> (in article<news:iqko6jFsmruU3@mid.individual.net>):
>>> iCloud end to end encryption is only PR.
>>
>> False.
>
> Does Apple give governments the encrypted files or the unencrypted files?
>
> Ron, the humblest guy in town.
>

Who knows, but someone has to give them to Apple, I assume, and it is
there that changes could be made.

--
Wilf

On 9/13/2021 6:20 PM, Ant wrote:
> In misc.phone.mobile.iphone Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>> In message <4audnWR8JIV_EKL8nZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212807 for v14.8's release notes.
>
>>> Next, v15? ;)
>
>> Yes, we already know iOS 15 will be released soon as some of us have
>> been running the beta for months. Could be tomorrow, more likely Friday
>> or next Week, depends on which schedule Apple chooses and when the new
>> phones will actually be in customer's hands,
>
> How's v15 so far? Stable enough?

I used to have automatic updates enabled on all my Apple devices
(iPhone, iPad, Watch). Now I'm a little more cautious. Just like you
should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released, you
now should probably wait a bit prior to installing iOS updates until
they can be vetted by independent sources.

In article <iql3juF4k0U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> > * only vouchers that are reviewed and verified by a human being to
> >> > be actual child abuse material are forwarded to authorities
> >>
> >> And the images that are viewed by an Apple employee are NOT the CSAM
> >> images, nor the user's image. They are VERY low resolution versions
> >> that are just enough that a human can tell there is probably a match
> >> (or not).
> >
> > that brings up a very interesting legal question for which i've not
> > yet seen a good answer.
> >
> > what amount (and type) of degradation is sufficient such that a
> > illegal image is no longer considered illegal, yet still recognizable
> > so that it can accurately be matched to an actual illegal csam image?
> >
> > i've seen all sorts of speculation, but nothing that is particularly
> > convincing.
>
> All we know is that the secure safety vouchers contain a "visual
> derivative" of the original photo. It wouldn't be all that hard to have
> AI trained to obscure sensitive portions of he human anatomy in a given
> photo. And I suspect that's exactly what Apple is doing.

maybe, but the question remains, what amount/type of degradation makes
an illegal image now legal to have.

> > presumably apple has a very good answer, but i've yet to see it.
>
> I doubt anyone outside of Apple will actually see it.

the *only* entity allowed to have such images is ncmec.

> But I have little
> doubt Apple can and will do it in a way that preserves privacy by
> obscuring sensitive portions of potential matches.

privacy isn't the issue.

the system is designed to preserve privacy, but the 'visual derivative'
has to be not too far off to be matchable, yet far enough to not be
considered itself csam.

In article <si5c04$oia$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released,

there is no point in doing that since the hardware is not going to
change unless there's a major hardware problem, in which case there
will be a recall to replace existing units.

> you
> now should probably wait a bit prior to installing iOS updates until
> they can be vetted by independent sources.

a few days is sufficient to weed out the major problems.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/13/2021 6:20 PM, Ant wrote:
>> In misc.phone.mobile.iphone Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>> In message <4audnWR8JIV_EKL8nZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> Ant
>>> <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>>>
>>> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212807 for v14.8's release notes.
>>
>>>> Next, v15? ;)
>>
>>> Yes, we already know iOS 15 will be released soon as some of us have
>>> been running the beta for months. Could be tomorrow, more likely Friday
>>> or next Week, depends on which schedule Apple chooses and when the new
>>> phones will actually be in customer's hands,
>>
>> How's v15 so far? Stable enough?
>
> I used to have automatic updates enabled on all my Apple devices
> (iPhone, iPad, Watch). Now I'm a little more cautious. Just like you
> should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released, you
> now should probably wait a bit prior to installing iOS updates until
> they can be vetted by independent sources.
>

I tend to wait a week or two until I make sure there aren’t a bunch of
complaints about the update.

On 9/16/2021 1:49 PM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> If they’re being uploaded to iCloud then check them there. No need to check
> them on your private personal device and use up system resources.

We all know what the eventual outcome of all this is going to be. Apple
will scan unencrypted files on their servers, which is what other
companies, like Facebook, already do.

Apple can still use the CSAM hashes, but on their servers, not on users’
devices. They can state something like: “our researchers invented a new
way to scan for CSAM using our servers so we no longer have a need to
scan on devices.”

Repairing the bruised image of NCMEC needs to also be attempted. Their
ill-advised message to Apple employees, labeling those who favor privacy
"the screeching voices of the minority" should never have happened (this
was an internal memo from Apple quoting a separate memo from NCMEC, so
both organizations are culpable). While it was intended to never be made
public, there were so many Apple employees that were upset at the CSAM
proposal, Apple should have known that the message would be leaked.

Hopefully Apple will put procedures in place that will prevent this kind
of thing in the future. Perhaps set up an advisory committee with
participants from leading privacy and human rights organizations to vet
anything they plan to add to their devices that affect privacy.

In a few months this whole debacle will fall out of the news cycle and
“those who must not be named,” those nattering nabobs of negativism that
have vainly attempted to deny the reality that this is, indeed, a back
door, will have find a new chew toy.

In message <si5c04$oia$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/13/2021 6:20 PM, Ant wrote:
>> In misc.phone.mobile.iphone Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>> In message <4audnWR8JIV_EKL8nZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>>> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212807 for v14.8's release notes.
>>
>>>> Next, v15? ;)
>>
>>> Yes, we already know iOS 15 will be released soon as some of us have
>>> been running the beta for months. Could be tomorrow, more likely Friday
>>> or next Week, depends on which schedule Apple chooses and when the new
>>> phones will actually be in customer's hands,
>>
>> How's v15 so far? Stable enough?

> I used to have automatic updates enabled on all my Apple devices
> (iPhone, iPad, Watch). Now I'm a little more cautious. Just like you
> should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released,

Nonsense.

> you now should probably wait a bit prior to installing iOS updates
> until they can be vetted by independent sources.

More nonsense. Millions of people have been using iOS 15 for months. If
you want to be super cautious, you could wait a day or two. Beyond that
is paranoia and silliness.

--
Q: What's the difference between a civil engineer and a military engineer?
A: A military engineer designs weapons, and a civil engineer designs targets.

In message <shvpm2$g8t$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/16/2021 7:11 AM, badgolferman wrote:
>> Wilf <wilf@postingx.uk> wrote:
>>> On 16/09/2021 at 03:23, Lewis wrote:
>>>> In message <16y8ioruep95q$.dlg@news.solani.org> RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 15, 2021, nospam wrote
>>>>> (in article<news:150920210158598871%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>>>>>> there are multiple ways to opt-out of csam checking,
>>>>
>>>>> How did you opt out to hackers & governments using the back doors?
>>>>
>>>> There is no back door.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've been watching this conversation and I am really am perplexed, so
>>> I'm hoping that one of you knowledgeable folk here can clarify for me
>>> and for others, maybe.
>>>
>>> Why do some people think there is or is going to be a "back door"? What
>>> do they classify as a "back door", and why do some here say there is no
>>> "back door"? TIA.
>>>
>>
>> It’s a matter of perspective. Call it a back door, side door, or full
>> frontal attack. What it comes down to is Apple is introducing a method
>> which will scan your personal device for files which someone has determined
>> are illegal. Who that “someone” is will be ambiguous forever.

> Exactly. Those that insist that it's not a "back door" are really
> arguing semantics.

> EFF called it a "narrow back door," which is probably the most accurate
> description.

The EFF has become a fund-raising organization. They have consistently
and repeatedly overstated and lied about numerous things in order to
fearmonger to fill their coffers.

> "All it would take to widen the narrow backdoor that Apple is building
> is an expansion of the machine learning parameters to look for

And there is the lie. Right there, in plain sight. They are
intentionally and knowingly mixing up tow thing to mislead their readers
into panic and donations to the EFF.

--
Polexia: Let's deflower the kid.

In message <1abkudaeje3yq.dlg@news.solani.org> RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, Lewis wrote
> (in article<news:slrnska0fu.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
>> And the parent is ONLY notified if the child confirms TWICE that they
>> want to view the image, and then the image is sent from the child's
>> phone to the parents, with the knowledge of the kid. Again, this is an
>> opt-in feature and no one gets secret messages forward to anyone.

> How can you still be so unaware of the real issue here with bad parents?

Which is why the parental notification only exists for children who re
12yo and under.

--
Margo: I look like Jack Sparrow if he were played by a man.
Eliot: I was actually thinking more like a fem bot Nick Fury.

On 18/09/2021 at 21:59, Lewis wrote:
> In message <si5c04$oia$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/13/2021 6:20 PM, Ant wrote:
>>> In misc.phone.mobile.iphone Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>> In message <4audnWR8JIV_EKL8nZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>>>> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212807 for v14.8's release notes.
>>>
>>>>> Next, v15? ;)
>>>
>>>> Yes, we already know iOS 15 will be released soon as some of us have
>>>> been running the beta for months. Could be tomorrow, more likely Friday
>>>> or next Week, depends on which schedule Apple chooses and when the new
>>>> phones will actually be in customer's hands,
>>>
>>> How's v15 so far? Stable enough?
>
>> I used to have automatic updates enabled on all my Apple devices
>> (iPhone, iPad, Watch). Now I'm a little more cautious. Just like you
>> should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released,
>
> Nonsense.
>
>> you now should probably wait a bit prior to installing iOS updates
>> until they can be vetted by independent sources.
>
> More nonsense. Millions of people have been using iOS 15 for months. If
> you want to be super cautious, you could wait a day or two. Beyond that
> is paranoia and silliness.
>
>

I have to say that I don't normally wait before applying iOS updates
and, so far, have never had a problem. Probably tempting fate now !!

--
Wilf

In message <shvvpm$11i8$3@gioia.aioe.org> Wilf <wilf@postingx.uk> wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 at 16:03, Lewis wrote:
>>> do they classify as a "back door", and why do some here say there is no
>>> "back door"? TIA.
>> A back door is a hidden feature or a flaw in software that allows unknown
>> and unauthorized access to a computer's data. There is no hidden
>> feature or flaw, not unknown access, no unauthorized access, no back
>> door.

> Might that just be semantics, though? Ok, so if a back door is something
> hidden, then this is not a back door per se. Maybe a 'Front Door'? But
> it could allow governments to insist that other hashes be included in
> the database used to identify offending pictures.

Back door has several criteria, not a singl one is matched by the CSAM
system

*) A hidden feature or bug
*) Allow unauthorized access
*) Allows surreptitious access
*) allows accessing the data on the computer or device

--
There's a race of men that don't fit in, A race that can't stay still
So they break the hearts of kith and kin, And they roam the world
at will.

In message <si3ao8$pmv$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/17/2021 4:16 PM, RonTheGuy wrote:

> <snip>

>> Is it only Lewis who is still unaware both types of on the phone scanning
>> were to be released by Apple under the same public relations blitz campaign?

> No, he, as well as all the others trying to defend this, are well aware
> that what they are saying is untrue.

You are, as always, full of shit.

You and the other troll morons are intentionally conflating two entire
different things.

--
It was easy to be a vegetarian by day. It was preventing yourself
from becoming a humanitarian at night that took the real effort.