Apple offer LLMs, so they are already on board with the LLM arguments.

I have many frustrations with LLMs, mainly around the type of user whos brain shuts down, but Apple would be walking a very fine line if they offer a service that they also will sue you for using.

Perhaps they should have used the Foundation Models to build their code. Really put Apple in a difficult position.

> For good reason

A reason. Not the same as a good reason.

The fact that you even point out that they committed illegal acts that would normally get prosecuted, and yet didn't, shows that IP enforcement is very loose depending on who did it.

>they committed illegal acts that would normally get prosecuted

I specifically differentiated civil law from criminal law in my original comment, and said it's unclear whether their acts were criminal.

This is one of the reasons I like rugby.

Probably being born from public schools, and teachers being the referees, they don't have to take any nonsense from players and can take the ball away from you, lose you ground you have gained, or card you if are abusive to the referee.

Abusive parents on the sidelines can result in sanctions on clubs.

Even if you think the referee made a bad call, it is never acceptable to be abusive to match officials.

It blows my mind the things I see in football they allow people to get away with.

I love how in rugby if two guys are going a little two hard at each other the referee will call them over along with their captains, and address the captains while these gigantic players stand there like children.

One other offshoot of rugby officiating is they will admit wrongs and they'll say things like "I didn't see that." Compare that to the NFL where the refs make a bad call and the league will back them up to the point of being ridiculous by reinterpreting the rules to make the officials right (see "not a catch").

Rugby is so refreshing.

> not go after whoever posted them?

What makes you think they aren't?

Because it's not mentioned anywhere who posted the images in the first place and which prison he or she is now living in.

The complaint in the article is about not taking down the images faster than within an hour.

The point is more that these images should not be uploadable in the first place, since they are trivially validated against the national DB to be CSAM.

And, from TFA:

> The program The Times wrote reported the images to the authorities. The images were removed, but some had been viewed hundreds of times.

> See eg how here in Singapore we have no minimum wage

The US does as well if they can pretend you made it up with "tips".

The reality is that staff then just work for peanuts.

Being able to charge you for using git.

There will be a new replacement app to combine them, but it will only handle around 60% of the functionality of both.

All three will receive no further updates.

I use Bagal Radio.

Yet they sold more minis than Google sells Pixels.

And somehow we ended up with more Pixels and not minis.

> ...said it found 332 ads featuring CSAM on Instagram and Facebook running in the US, UK, EU, Australia and India.

What has WhatsApp got to do with this? Just because it is Meta?

Are you suggesting WhatsApp is not part of the same evil company that is happy to spam the world with dangerous and horrible ads?

What part of "because it is part of Meta" implies that is not part of Meta?

Than what do you mean with what does it have to do with it? Isn't that obvious then?

That WhatsApp doesn't serve adverts?

I do ask that question.

And no, it's not obvious how a service is bad so if you use a different service then you are just as bad as unrelated people.

What are you even arguing about? WhatsApp does serve ads, obviously.

https://whatsappbusiness.com/

I don't see any information about adverts in your link.

It talks about having a business WhatsApp number so customers can contact you.