I guess the feds really want a picture of my cock and balls for official purposes.

Also, this is clearly unconstitutional but the dems clearly don’t give a shit.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    14·
    6 months ago

    You mean to say that the announcement from the PR team of the president signing the EO DOESN’T mention the part that they know most people will abhor? Quelle surprise!

    • pezmaker@programming.dev
      5·
      6 months ago

      Ok, I don’t know why I’m even bothering, but here’s why I think this is nothing more than conjecture at best and probably just outright dishonest manipulation.

      1. OP’s link cites directly the eo announcement, that’s where I found the link it. The announcement says literally nothing about scanning your photos and documents. It’s about making sure aps aren’t sharing your shit in the background. That ai generators aren’t marketing it for creating revenge/child porn, aren’t monetizing it if they do, protecting your photos and docs from being stolen and disseminated without permission. Not one thing indicates it’s about scanning what shit you have on your phone.

      2. OP’s link, links to another blog/opinion piece that seems to be the source of the “scanning photos for bad content” junk that I’m claiming has no logical source and is made up bs to rile up the already haters

      President Biden wants to probe everyone’s smartphones as part of a sweeping surveillance effort.

      From which I quote

      This proposal implies that mobile operating systems would need to scan and analyze images directly on users’ devices to determine if they are sexual or non-consensual.

      There’s no linked document evidence of what the op or either of the 2 level deep op-eds are claiming. There is no source beyond the above quote claiming it’s implied. It’s literally made up. The linked eo announcement says nothing about scanning your phone for what types of content/documents you have… I read nothing anywhere that implies this.

      I don’t want shit scanning my phone. I think we all agree that’s definitely a long way over the line. I see nothing that indicates that’s what this is even remotely close to doing. So why is it being shared and claimed that it is?