filup

What does that have to do with incpa?

I send this server a question encrypted. It stays encrypted yet the server distinguished my ciphertext enough to produce a coherent reply. That means there was enough information in the ciphertext for the server to perform the inference, even if it was obscured to where it looks indistinguishable, it apparently wasn't.

This doesn't remove trust from the equation, it puts the trust directly on the algorithm. Probably one no one can explain to me like I'm 5. But because it's encrypted I am no longer breaking the law by processing on protected data. I imagine very large contracts await on the other side. Lots of money to be made.

>They didn’t say that it “appears” indistinguishable from noise, but that it is indistinguishable.

That's the oxymoron. If it was indistinguishable nothing could be gained.

It's not about me being able to distinguish it. It's the model provider saying they cant, when they can.

How can it possibly pass indcpa. If the model can give me any valuable information about the cipher. Apparently the middle man would know precisely what is contained in the payload.

If it only appears indistinguishable from noise, but it's actually not, then it's just deception.

I'm not saying that you can't design a system for secure cloud computing.

Proper encryption means the ciphertext is indistinguishable from noise. So...in order to be able to process on it, you have to make it not indistinguishable from noise.

So I take offense to the term FHE. It's a oxymoron.

The whole thing immidiatly stands out as a sham to build trust where it's gone.

Is margarin actually bad for me? Or did big butter win.

Interesting read thanks.

Yes, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy while driving on public roads.

The expectation has been completely eroded by flock safety.

It hasn't been articulated in court. But what flock has essentially done is created a GPS system without satilites.

See Jones vs USA.

Sufficiently saturated ALPRs across the country give you the same capability of GPS. Without GPS.

Clearly a different situation considering the guy was in a rental vehical with GPS.

Of course their is no reasonable expectation of privacy here. It's not his car lol. The LEARN db query was auxillary to the precedent here.

I can't see the jump your making at all or how this precedent holds any would hold water in the case of a innocent party. Its probably just a matter of time until the perfect case is presented and new case law established. Precedents change you know?

>If the city hires enough police officers, yes. It'd almost certainly require an unfathomably large budget, but it's not impossible.

If the precedent was set based on this idea. It will fall apart with further scrutiny.

>I really don't understand how people got this idea in their head that their license plates are private information . How do red light cameras identify cars? How does parking enforcement work? By recording people's license plates. The whole reason why we mandate that cars display license plates to is to facilitate identifying vehicles.

I don't think that is where the crux of the issue lay.