Apple's iPhone scanning scandal and the Mac

[Maconplasma]

But not Linux

Linux barely has the software support from major manufacturers as Windows and MacOS. It's been that way for years and not much has changed. Furthermore you can't just walk into Best Buy and buy your choice of computer with Linux installed. That has to be done by the user and the majority of the world knows nothing about Linux or cares to install a completely different OS when they buy a Windows machine. Even further the corporate world isn't supporting Linux. That's a tinkerer's OS.

 

[k27]

Linux barely has the software support from major manufacturers as Windows and MacOS. It's been that way for years and not much has changed.

This is not always needed either. There are often open source alternatives. Sometimes these are even better.

DaVinci Resolve is available for Linux. Capture One Pro could follow.

Do you have Capture One for Linux?

QUESTION Do you have Capture One that can run on Linux? ANSWER Currently, the Capture One software is only compatible with macOS and Windows. If you would like to have Capture One for Linux in th...

support.captureone.com

 

[Maconplasma]

This is not always needed either. There are often open source alternatives. Sometimes these are even better.

Try and convince corporations who use exclusive software that doesn't support Linux.

DaVinci Resolve is available for Linux.

DaVinci Resolve is fine product but as a Mac user who uses FCPX even I know a mixed environment works better with Adobe Creative Cloud since it's the most used suite which supports only Mac and Windows and not Linux.

Capture One Pro could follow.

Unfortunately this goes under the category of Coulda Woulda Shoulda, Perhaps, Maybe, Might, Potential, Being Discussed, Possibility.
As a Mac user I went through this for years. Even AutoDesk who supports MacOS STILL has limited applications for Mac vs. the Windows counterparts.

When there are slim to no computers that commonly ship with Linux installed as the only OS Developers of major applications won't waste the time because they are catering to tinkerers who like you stated will generally use open source alternatives.

 

[k27]

Well, I use my Mac privately. And Linux is very much an alternative for that. Especially if Apple turns into a spy company and snoops around in user data.
This also has the advantage that you don't have to buy the usually overpriced Apple hardware (especially the absurd prices for Ram and SSD).

 

[crymimefireworks]

Linux barely has the software support from major manufacturers as Windows and MacOS. It's been that way for years and not much has changed. Furthermore you can't just walk into Best Buy and buy your choice of computer with Linux installed. That has to be done by the user and the majority of the world knows nothing about Linux or cares to install a completely different OS when they buy a Windows machine. Even further the corporate world isn't supporting Linux. That's a tinkerer's OS.

Yes! You gotta check out System76. They're changing the game for Linux by being a Linux-focused vendor. All their techs know Linux, and they customize their hardware to optimize for Linux. It's incredible, nothing like this used to exist, as you explained. Revolutionary.

 

[quarkysg]

Thanks. Can you be more specific in regards to the topic, what relevant laws do businesses need to obey in this case?

AFAIK, wrt to CSAM, all service providers operating in the US would have to report CSAM materials if they know that such materials are stored in their servers. Apple's approach, as far as I understand it, is to satisfy this requirements. Some folks have stated that Apple is not required to actively scan for such materials, and I agree to this point. I would think Apple will get into trouble with the law if the users of their services are found to possess such materials in Apple's servers and is being accused to not doing anything. That is the reason I think why Facebook, Google are doing such scans.

From what I've read, Apple already does this (CSAM scans) already when photos are uploaded into iCloud Photo. So why is Apple moving this to their devices? The only logical assumption is to finally enable E2EE for iCloud Photo uploads. Otherwise they cannot satisfy this legal requirements. I believe this is the main reason why Apple abandoned E2EE for iCloud Photo previously. I don't believe the FBI is the one pressuring Apple to not do it, because I believe the FBI has no legal standing in this matter.

Apple's proposed approach for CSAM, for all intent and purposes, to me, is equivalent to server side scanning, as Apple has stated that the hash is only happening when an upload occurs. Otherwise no hashing is done. There's no scanning of photos as far as I know. At no point is Apple able to view anything on device. It is up to anyone to believe what Apple has stated, but I have no reason to think why Apple would be lying.

Now, many folks have floated many 'what ifs' scenarios, but have missed the fact that Apple already have the ability to 'scan' and report 'illegal' materials to authorities. It could have been done right at this moment, for all their devices. Ditto for Google with Android, and Microsoft for Windows. But the question would be why would they do that? It serves Apple no purpose in doing this, at least to me anyway.

To sum it up, I do not think Apple wants to police anyone (which some are alluding to) in this instance. They are just trying to comply to legal requirements, while trying to provide features that their users find compelling, privacy being one of them. Apple is not being altruistic. They just think that doing so will help make better business.

 

[joykin]

What surprises me about this whole subject are the amazed reactions. I've seen it coming for decades. My dad saw it back in the 60's and told me about it in the 80's.