Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

iToddlers btfo'd.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

sweetheart what this mean in r-slur terms pls?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Apple last year said they'll be scanning pictures on your phone for child porn. This caused backlash so they quietly dropped it or at least that's what it seemed. They never actually said definitively they would not and this guy got notified by a program he has that his Mac was trying to send his pictures to a Media Analysis program.

What for, what exactly and how much is unknown but putting two and two together this guy is essentially announcing that Apple went through with the photo scanning despite privacy issues behind its user's backs. He noticed this on his Mac but there's no reason to assume his phone would be different.

Of course to play devil's advocate a question exists as to why he's the first person to ever notice and report this but I have to assume it was just bad (good?) luck imo. Also there's the question of whether the place it's being sent to actually is what he thinks it is but they're still yanking your pics for something without consent.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

tysm avalon bb 🫶🏾🫶🏾 ok i got nothing illegal on my phone but i got a bunch of 👀 pics so that means the glowie can see everthing to huh ☹️😓

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The person is likely wrong. This is most likely related to the AI feature that scans your photos (search "dog" in Photos and dog photos will come up).


Follower of Christ :marseyandjesus: Tech lover, IT Admin, heckin pupper lover and occasionally troll. I hold back feelings or opinions, right or wrong because I dislike conflict.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Maybe? Chances are they're not even sending the photos but a hash of them (which depending on how they do it could be easily dehashed tbf) or the like just to run against hashed photos of CP for a match. No one probably ever lays eyes on your photos.

Or at least that's what they say, and considering they went back user's backs to do do this there's already going to be issues of trust and stuff anyway. And you have slippery slope issues besides. Though honestly I'm not sure most will heavily care either.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the only hash i kno is hash browns bb 🥲🥲 imma ask my man i usually hate bugging him to explain codecel shit but tf

tysm for trying bb 🤗🤗

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hashing is like cyphers. Think turning your picture into numerical data and running a formula on that data to swap around characters. Makes it unreadable but as long as you have the same starting picture the final hash should be the same.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't think they're using anything as primitive as hashing any more, with their neural cores and all that shit on modern CPUs/GPUs they're probably deploying an image categorization AI that will look at your pictures and spit out 'this is a picture of a cat' and 'this is a picture of a person and a cat' and 'this is a picture of a foid taking her pitbull's knot.'

They might call it a 'hashing algorithm' but it'll be so much more than that. Hashing images is so last century, it's so easily defeated.

Remember it's super important to use alt texts for online images.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

which depending on how they do it could be easily dehashed tbf

I doubt it. Modern hash functions are way too secure for it to be reversed unless the programmers made an obvious mistake.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If one of your pics gets misclassified as a child, glowies will look at it.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.