> why can't you accept the fact that the societal benefit outweighs the potential risk?

Because a shit technical solution (which opens the doors to other abuses) isn’t the fix. Because Apple are not the government.

A meaningful scheme to protect the children would need: - better sex ed in schools - better education for parents and people who would like to become parents as to the risks and signs - publicly announced meaningful support for people who self-identify with dangerous thoughts and seek help before their thoughts become behaviours - better support for people from abusive homes as they mature - (probably) two or three generations to pass through before you could measure statistically sound improvement

Sarcasm doesn't land well here, especially when it's a long comment.

Thinking about false positives is the wrong thing to focus on. The point is the technology could be applied to any image such as Tiannanmen Square, Hong Kong, depictions of God, Muhammad, or Jesus, etc.

/s doesn't work here, it's not reddit.

> Rather than oppose a measure to protect children because of the fear of a few false positives, why can't you accept the fact that the societal benefit outweighs the potential risk?

But Apple apologists has been telling me all day that I could stop the system from scanning if I just disable iCloud.

If a person can disable it that easily, then the system is effectively useless.