XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: andrew@spam.net   
      
   Jolly Roger wrote on 25 Jul 2024 19:22:24 GMT :   
      
   >>> You're simply guessing. I'm using logic.  They're different logical   
   >>> algorithms.   
   >>   
   >> Nope. You're guessing just as much as JR.   
   >>   
   >> The facts - and we know you like them, but never look for them - are   
   >> that there are many convictions on a depressingly regular basis. Just   
   >> look at the press releases from the DoJ Project Safe Childhood:   
   >> https://www.justice.gov/psc/press-room   
   >   
   > My statements aren't guesses. There have been plenty of convictions.   
   >   
   > Unfortunately, there have also been privacy violations of innocent   
   > people. And that's my primary concern when it comes to CSAM scanning.   
      
   Chris just lied about convictions.   
   Why did Chris lie?   
      
   I don't know why Chris lied.   
   All I know is that Chris lied.   
      
   I suspect Chris felt the need to lie because he had no valid point.   
   The cite Chris listed said NOTHING whatsoever about the conviction rate.   
      
   It's like me saying people in Alaska are all Eskimos and when Chris asks me   
   to prove it I point to a long listing of Italians in Florida instead.   
      
   It's revealing that Chris has to resort to lies to defend his assessment.   
   It means that Chris' assessment that CSAM scanning is effective - is false.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)