Google says that SafetyCore “provides on-device infrastructure for securely and privately performing classification to help users detect unwanted content
Cheers Google but I'm a capable adult, and able to do this myself.
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
962 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
63376 readers
4273 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
True or not, one can avoid the whole issue by using your phone as a phone, maybe to send texts, with location, mike, and camera switched off permanently, and all the other apps deleted or disabled. Sure, Google will still know you called your SO daily and your Mom once a week (NOT ENOUGH!), and that you were supposed to pick up the dry cleaning last night (did you?). Meh. If that's what floats the Surveillance Society's boat, I am not too worried.
People can go further than that and install a ROM for their phone that doesn't have any Google apps on it. People can even use applications that normally require Google Play Services by using microG, which spoofs things. You can also root your phone with Magisk and use apps to block anything leaking anything else.
Thnx for this, just uninstalled it, google are arseholes
Great, it'll have to plow through ~30GB of 1080p recordings of darkness and my upstairs neighbors living it up in the AMs. And nothing else.
Per one tech forum this week
Stop spreading misinformation.
graphene folks have a real love for the word misinformation (and FUD, and brigading). That's not you under there👻, Daniel, is it?
After 5 years of his ~~antics~~ hateful bullshit lies, I think I can genuinely say that word triggers me.
If the app did what op is claiming then the EU would have a field day fining google.
To quote the most salient post
The app doesn't provide client-side scanning used to report things to Google or anyone else. It provides on-device machine learning models usable by applications to classify content as being spam, scams, malware, etc. This allows apps to check content locally without sharing it with a service and mark it with warnings for users.
Which is a sorely needed feature to tackle problems like SMS scams
You don't need advanced scanning technology running on every device with access to every single bit of data you ever seen to detect scam. You need telco operator to stop forwarding forged messages headers and… that's it. Cheap, efficient, zero risk related to invasion of privacy through a piece of software you did not need but was put there "for your own good".
Why do you need machine learning for detecting scams?
Is someone in 2025 trying to help you out of the goodness of their heart? No. Move on.
If you want to talk money then it is in businesses best interest that money from their users is being used on their products, not being scammed through the use of their products.
Secondly machine learning or algorithms can detect patterns in ways a human can't. In some circles I've read that the programmers themselves can't decipher in the code how the end result is spat out, just that the inputs will guide it. Besides the fact that scammers can circumvent any carefully laid down antispam, antiscam, anti-virus through traditional software, a learning algorithm will be magnitudes harder to bypass. Or easier. Depends on the algorithm
I don't know the point of the first paragraph...scams are bad? Yes? Does anyone not agree? (I guess scammers)
For the second we are talking in the wild abstract, so I feel comfortable pointing out that every automated system humanity has come up with so far has pulled in our own biases and since ai models are trained by us, this should be no different. Second, if the models are fallible, you cannot talk about success without talking false positives. I don't care if it blocks every scammer out there if it also blocks a message from my doctor. Until we have data on consensus between these new algorithms and desired outcomes, it's pointless to claim they are better at X.
if the cellular carriers were forced to verify that caller-ID (or SMS equivalent) was accurate SMS scams would disappear (or at least be weaker). Google shouldn't have to do the job of the carriers, and if they wanted to implement this anyway they should let the user choose what service they want to perform the task similar to how they let the user choose which "Android system WebView" should be used.
Carriers don't care. They are selling you data. They don't care how it's used. Google is selling you a phone. Apple held down the market for a long time for being the phone that has some of the best security. As an android user that makes me want to switch phones. Not carriers.
So is this really just a local AI model? Or is it something bigger? My S25 Ultra has the app but it hasn't used any battery or data.
I mean the grapheneos devs say it is. Are they going to lie.
Yes, absolutely, and regularly, and without shame.
But not usually about technical stuff.
laughs in GrapheneOS
view more: next ›