> Apple will absolutely check images on your device.
Yes, they will check the images you have chosen to upload. No ‘scanning is involved’.
Claiming this is ‘scanning users devices’ is just dishonest - it’s obvious that it creates a false dichotomy impression of what they are actually doing.
Even if we accept that. It is a lie to say the device is being scanned. It is definitely not. Only the photos the user chooses to upload are checked. That is not the device.
It is part of the device, and this specific part is being scanned. Can I physically remove this “checking” part and end up with a working iDevice D that resembles D = {{Device \ {/iCloud/Photo Library}}?
The checking is being done on the device. Nobody disputes that. Indeed it is being marketed by Apple as a feature. Yes, this feature is part of the device.
If you say Apple is scanning the device, you are lying. They are not scanning the device. They are scanning photos chosen for upload.
This is about the 16th time I have seen language just like this used to explain away this concern. I don't know if you realize, but this wording makes it sound like you can select some photos and leave others local. I can find no indication anywhere, including on my phone, that iCloud Photos is anything other than an All Or Nothing singular toggle in iCloud settings. If you have instructions to the contrary, I will be happy to stand corrected.
Seriously, everybody is wording it like this. "Photos you choose..." and similar.
Another commenter put it in better terms, so you may understand it:
Suppose we know there are people who smuggle drugs on airplanes on their person for the purpose of something terrible, like addicting children or poisoning people. If I run an airport I could say: to stop this, I'm going to subject everyone who flies out of my airport to a body-cavity search. Tim, and Craig, are you OK with this? If I can say, "Don't worry! We have created this great robots that ensure the body cavity searches are gentle and the minimum needed to check for illegal drugs," does it really change anything to make it more acceptable to you?
No falsehoods, it is the device, even though it is only a specific part of it. I know you got the point I tried (or rather, the other commenter) to make about the part of someone's body meaning "the whole" of a person. Same philosophical view can be applied to the device.
Anyway, someone in here can accept what the other can't, so let's leave at that and let history tells.
Chrome safe browsing feature shows a warning if you browse to a URL which Google have flagged as hosting known malware. If you described this as "Google blocks your device from connecting to servers that don't have their approval" would the listener get an accurate understanding of what was and was not happening?
If Chrome scanned downloaded files for viruses and you described that to someone as "scans your computer for viruses" do you think the listener would come away with an accurate understanding of what was happening and accurate understanding of what they were and were not being protected from?
If BestBuy GeekSquad offered a service to "check your device for problems" and all they did was open your photo collection, would you walk away arguing that it proves the screen and mouse and CPU and disk must function and nobody could expect them to do any more than that, service provided, full marks, that's "the device" checked? Or would you hope that "checking the device for problems" might involve at least exercising all the major features like speakers, wifi, bluetooth, at least once, and preferably with stress and thermal tests?
When the TSA ask you to switch your device on to demonstrate that it's not a bomb, are you on the side of "if the screen lights up, the device is thoroughly and effectively tested and cannot contain anything else" or on the side of "an attacker could make up many ways to make the screen glow while hollowing out the insides, this does not really demonstrate that 'the device' is safe"?
They're not misunderstanding it; you're deliberately using an inaccurate description to mislead people while trying to hide behind "technically not lying", and they're calling you out on it.
Am I, though? Is Apple? Is parent's? It seems "their" (whoever you meant) interpretation of what does and doesn't constitute something is looser than my interpretation.
What you're doing is changing "Two Americans run their homes on solar panels" into "American homes run on solar panels" with the intent of fudging the quantity so that readers assume it means most or all of them, while being able to argue "they are American homes, plural, so it's correct".
"Device scans photos" and "Apple scans device" imply two very different things about how much is scanned, and you're using the latter because you know that if you describe it accurately readers won't be as panicked as you want them to be.
>Apple didn’t announce any timeframe about when will they implement child safety features in third-party apps. Apple said that they still have to complete testing of child features and ensure that the use of this feature in third-party apps will not bring any privacy harm
> EDIT: For Question below
https://technokilo.com/apple-child-safety-feature-third-part...
>Apple didn’t announce any timeframe about when will they implement child safety features in third-party apps. Apple said that they still have to complete testing of child features and ensure that the use of this feature in third-party apps will not bring any privacy harm
The Q&A mentioned has no date or time. No Apple Spokespeople are named. There are no actual quotes. No well known news outlets have mentioned this very consequential detail.
At what point would you consider it "scanning the device"? What if they start scanning messages? Browsing history? Downloads? Where do you draw the line?
People do understand the difference. It is only you who seem to be confused about the easily understand words that's people are using.
When people say that the device is being scanned for pictures, they know what that means. So it is fine for them to say that the device is being scanned for pictures.
First of all, I have no affiliation with Apple, not do I own any Apple stock.
Do you have any affiliations we should be aware of?
Secondly, I haven’t ‘defended Apple’ in any comments. Indeed there are comments in which I make a judgement about this topic where I say that what Apple is doing is distasteful and offensive.
Elsewhere I have pointed out that if Apple wants to scan people’s devices they have many other mechanisms at their fingertips than this narrowly tailored tool.
What exactly do you think I’m ‘defending Apple’ from? Quite a few of my comments are critical of false or immaculate characterizations of what Apple is actually doing.
If you consider that to be a defense of Apple, then I disagree.
For the most part there just seems to be a lot of confusion about what Apple is doing, and general frustration about the state of computing.
Do you really think of these as ‘attacks’ on Apple?
Wow you're right - over the past 9 days zepto's generated ~5 pages of comments defending Apple's scanning. Why would one dedicate so much time and effort to rise to the defense of a trillion dollar company?
Yes, they will check the images you have chosen to upload. No ‘scanning is involved’.
Claiming this is ‘scanning users devices’ is just dishonest - it’s obvious that it creates a false dichotomy impression of what they are actually doing.
Don’t do that.