HN user

daemoon

46 karma
Posts0
Comments26
View on HN
No posts found.

So if an offender turns off iCloud then this move will absolutely be useless??

No on-device photo scanning unless iCloud Photos is enabled. Isn't funny when you get the most important aspect wrong?

How would that help catch them if they can simply flip the switch?

They never claimed that this would help "catch them" if they are not using iCloud Photos.

Simply turning off iCloud Photos will ensure that photos on your iPhone are never scanned. Why are you trying to make this thing about photos stored on-device? Photos in iCloud have always been available to Apple through iCloud backups. If you are concerned about privacy, turn it off.

"And it does so while providing significant privacy benefits over existing techniques since Apple only learns about users’ photos if they have a collection of known CSAM in their iCloud Photos account."

How ridiculous is that!

Not as ridiculous as being well aware of the limitations of iPhones wrt to installing applications outside of App Store and still buying one. People should vote with their wallets. Me personally I do not mind the limitations, but if you do - don't buy it.

Especially since the feature to alert users of the possible privacy invasion outlined here, seems to not yet be working as advertised.

The AirTag was not moving, hence the lack of notifications. Otherwise you'd get a ton of notification practically anywhere you approach an AirTag. It is working as intended.

Its inherent fragility means that transmission boosting ‘cell’ antennae are generally required every 100–300 m—which is far more spatially dense than the transmission masts required for older 2G, 3G and 4G technology, using lower frequency waves

I can see that it's necessary to place 5G masts more densely in order to deliver the promised transmission rates and coverage but it seems like a bad solution to a greater problem. Assuming the trend continues one would need even more cells to deliver 6G, 7G etc. Are there no other ways of increasing the bandwidth without placing a mast at every city corner?

You're not guaranteed free speech by private corps, they're not a government after all.

I don't have a problem with any of those names but it's their policy which developers agree to before publishing apps.

You can easily notice the difference in a battery after it has gone through 500 charge cycles...

Of course, that's how batteries work. However, 500 charge cycles will likely not affect CPU performance but rather the battery life (which is why I said "enough for it to affect performance").

I had 1352 charge cycles and 75% battery health before replacing it and even though the battery life was shortened, I did not experience any sudden shut downs.

On the "we con you to buy a new $1000 phone every year by manipulating the CPU/battery so instead you paying $70 for a new battery, we skin you" they did pretty bad and I will never buy another Apple device for that.

Three things:

1. It takes more than a year, maybe 3-4, to degrade the battery enough for it to affect performance in any way.

2. There are many iPhone models at different price points, the cheapest one being $399.

3. If they didn't cap the performance they would be making headlines for "Older iPhones suddenly power off for no reason" instead.

Their only mistake was to not communicate good enough to the users that performance would return back to normal after a battery replacement.