Broadly similar to what Apple is trying with their private compute work.

It's a great idea but the trust chains are so complex they are hard to reason about.

In "simple" public key encryption reasonably technically literate people can reason about it ("not your key, not your X") but with private compute there are many layers, each of which works in a fairly complex way and AFAIK you always end up having to trust a root source of trust that certifies the trusted device.

It's good in the sense it is trust minimization, but it's hard to explain and the cynicism (see HN comments similar to "you can't trust it because big tech/gov interference etc) means I am sadly pessimistic about the uptake.

I wish it wasn't so though. The cynicism in particular I find disappointing.

> We’re sharing an early look into Private Processing, an optional capability that enables users to initiate a request to a confidential and secure environment and use AI for processing messages where no one — including Meta and WhatsApp — can access them.

What is this and what is this supposed to mean? I have a hard time trusting these companies with any privacy and while this wording may be technically correct they’ll likely extract all meaning from your communication, probably would even have some AI enabled surveillance service.

Love the Accept-only cookie notice. A real trust builder.

So this is fb explaining how they are using your content from e2ee to cloud and back ? So not even Fb knows the content ?

Simple question. What if csam is sent to ai. Would it stop, or report to authorities or allow processing ? Same for bad stuff.