“Apple created its own proprietary alternative, NeuralHash, which apparently wasn’t as good. So Apple U-turned on its efforts to scan for CSAM in its cloud storage. Instead, Apple implemented end-to-end encryption for iCloud files.”
Wasn’t Apple’s design to explicitly NOT scan in its cloud storage, but look at the file on-device at the moment you wish to upload it to iCloud? This method would make it compatible with Advanced Data Protection; so ADP could have always been in the pipeline rather than Apple u-turning. In fact, NeuralHash may have been proposed because Apple wanted to introduce ADP and saw a potential problem here/get concerns from government agencies about it and saw this as a means to an end(-to-end).
The system was designed pretty elegantly and offers far better privacy protections - including guardrails - than what Microsoft and Google do, but the communication from Apple about it was absolutely horrible and generated enormous backlash. (Not saying I agreed with implementing it, just saying the design was infinitely better than competitors.)
A mandatory client side scanning system with an opaque database filled with unverifiable entries would render many of the protections provided by ADP meaningless. Its was insane that Apple was even considering such an idea in the first place.
Unfortunately the ECJ’s orders aren’t strictly followed and they recently pretty much indicated they could support an atrocious law like ProtectEU. Perhaps to save face.
Courts are always the last line of defense, there is no way of avoiding that. Rights are never absolute, but have to be balanced against each other, and the courts are the arbiter of that.
Aside from that, raising public awareness like the Chat Control initiative did is the way to go. And voting in the EU Parliament elections.
Yes it is the way to go but politicians get fatigued because they keep pushing the same thing so often. Also the lobbyists have big bags of money to throw at it.
If you do not tax cooperate income away, or at least force them by law to bind it in investments, it will attack the surrounding containment vessel of laws and culture.
This will not happen. If Apple complies, it complies. They can’t blame Apple for not following a random EU directive in jurisdictions outside of the EU to begin with. They’re even different legal entities. The EU is not going to do anything about this at all and if they try: it will be blocked. I’ll check back here in 6 months to see how this aged.
That’s also why the EU probably won’t get more strict than this. The climate is very bad for tech companies with increasingly vague and weird laws (that mostly nobody asked for I might add) and this is starting to piss some countries off as they see other continents starting to excel and we can’t catch up due to such insane amounts of red tape.
That’s not how international laws and customs work. Besides, be careful what you wish for since if they’d follow that line of thought you’re in for a 20-25% tax plus an import fee for importing electronic devices from a different jurisdiction. (Also, the non-compliancy would be your doing as importer; not Apple’s.)
3.) that’s not exactly true. Currently, you can choose for an open system or a walled garden in which you can’t be de facto blackmailed in to leaving the walled garden. With this so called freedom of choice you mention, I am no longer able to choose for a true walled garden. If I rely on certain apps that are moved to their own store, I am forced to go there and break the walled garden. Ergo: my choice is taken away from me. For completely arbitrary reasons.
As it was you had choices as a consumer; open, closed - whatever you want. But the thing I deliberately want to choose for is now taken away from me through one of the worst and most unfair business laws I’ve ever seen, that only does harm to the majority of consumers whose choice is taken away and whose privacy and safety is being weakened to destroyed. But “they have a choice to stay in their walled garden” (they just can’t use their phone the way they want and were always used to anymore if they do, but we don’t mention that part and we don’t care those millions of people are getting royally screwed over).
You know, true choice could’ve been achieved if the EU had made a fair law. They didn’t and now we as consumers are going to pay a very heavy price.
Wasn’t Apple’s design to explicitly NOT scan in its cloud storage, but look at the file on-device at the moment you wish to upload it to iCloud? This method would make it compatible with Advanced Data Protection; so ADP could have always been in the pipeline rather than Apple u-turning. In fact, NeuralHash may have been proposed because Apple wanted to introduce ADP and saw a potential problem here/get concerns from government agencies about it and saw this as a means to an end(-to-end).
The system was designed pretty elegantly and offers far better privacy protections - including guardrails - than what Microsoft and Google do, but the communication from Apple about it was absolutely horrible and generated enormous backlash. (Not saying I agreed with implementing it, just saying the design was infinitely better than competitors.)