jSnively

About

Username
jSnively
Joined
Visits
305
Last Active
Roles
administrator
Points
1,143
Badges
2
Posts
462

Reactions

522Like2Dislike106Informative

  • Dubious leak details the exact specifications of Apple's foldable iPhone

    jSnivelyjSnively
    We have updated the score on this rumor. While we do expect certain aspects of the rumor to be possible-to-likely (as Wes' mentioned above they are simply parroted fom other more reliable sources), the score still does not tonally match the rest of the content and has been updated to reflect that.

    Sometimes we get it wrong, and we'll keep a better eye on it going forward. We appreciate the feedback. 
    DAalsethForumPost

  • Dubious leak details the exact specifications of Apple's foldable iPhone

    jSnivelyjSnively
    charlesn said:
    Please, AppleInsider, drop the charade and end the stupidity of the Rumor Score. So unknown person "zwz," with no known or verifiable record of leaking, says some sh*t and you slap a "Possible" on it. Well, sure--I guess anything's possible on any given day, so I guess anything anyone claims going forward gets a Possible. Hey: Apple Car is coming in 2027! You read it here first! "POSSIBLE"
    The rumor score of “Possible” doesn’t quite match with the language of the article (“dubious”, “grain of salt”, “doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense at times”, “shady”, “questionable specs”, “likely wrong”).

    ”Shady” especially. Shady connotes a sense of… I don’t know… the possibility of immoral character or unethical behavior, maybe. “Shady” is quite strong of a word to use… while then still saying it’s “Possible”, lol.
    DAalseth said:
    “Possible” is being way too generous, should be more like B&#$!@*T.
    The item is over a year and a half out if then. At this point few of these details would be finalized. 

    Y'all are correct about the rumor score, we're looking into it (I don't want to unilaterally just change it.) Mike has COVID, I was out sick Tues/Wed, and Kasper is deailng with faimly issues. Mistakes happen, but it has been a rough week over here 🥴
    apple4thewinDAalsethjellybellyForumPost

  • Apple Maps shows users the Gulf of Mexico when searching for 'Gulf of America'

    jSnivelyjSnively

    When we first added reactions we had a 'lol' button which nobody used. When we later removed the dislike button, people absued the 'lol' button as 'dislike' so we had to remove that one as well. We actually just can't have nice things.
    ronnjdw

  • If your iPhone alarms aren't going off, you're not alone

    jSnivelyjSnively
    It happened to me just the other week. Usually does about once or twice a year and has for a while. No real rhyme or reason 🤷
    appleinsideruser

  • Apple sued over 2022 dropping of CSAM detection features

    jSnivelyjSnively
    williamh said:

    In a truly E2E (iCloud photos are not unless you turn it on) system, hash scanning doesn't work as Apple never sees the original content on their servers. The only way to do it is to scan on device before anything goes anywhere. Apple's original annoucment around this effort was somewhat convoluted (but actually pretty smart) and didn't trigger on single matches (for fasle-positive reasons you mention) but it did have to do with scanning actual content not just hashes, which is why there's probably confusion.

    As I understood it, your device would have a csam hash database and your device would hash your images, so the detection would happen on your device using data on your device.  In any case, the technique involved hashes and not trying to determine the image content. 

    I'm trying to think back to the last time this came up and we looked into it for editorial purposes. IIRC it's either actually illegal (there's a lot of really unintuitive laws around this stuff) or at the least just a very bad idea to distribute that databse to the phones in the first place, as it can be extracted and used to circumvent detection. There were also concerns about 'posioining' the database with other content, espeically in countries with fewer (or no) freedom of speech protections. 

    There was a fuzzy ML implementation approach akin to Microsoft's PhotoDNA included in the initial pitch as well. It wasn't just a dumb hash based solution, as it (and Microsoft's in-use PhotoDNA) are designed to detect changes (cropping, mirroing, color shifting, etc.) in the content while still idenitfying it. I do not recall off the top of my head if they ever released a full whitepaper on the approach. Someone else can dig it up if they care (edit: elijahg did link the pdf above.)

    I beleive it took about half a week after researchers got ahold of Apple's implementation for testing to make it reliabally generate false positives, which meant the whole thing was ultimately useless. Some of these projects are still up on github like https://github.com/anishathalye/neural-hash-collider . That's why Apple really decided not to do it in the end. It was a clever approach from a privacy respecting perspective, it just didn't work well enough and had some external world-facing issues to boot.

    The lawsuit itself is frought with problems. Keep reading AppleInsider and we'll keep you updated on its progress 😁
    williamhronndewme