Apple to fight absurd order to allow a backdoor for the flawless Feds

[shockaholic12]

Legally.
And that's the age we live in.
People -wait, scratch that, terrorist pieces of shit- will be flying drones into stadiums in the next decade if not the next few years. That's the reality.

It's also a reality that if we want our authorities to protect us, some of our rights are gonna get cramped. The outcry would be deafening if an attack killed citizens and the government could have prevented it but didn't because terrorists deserve their privacy.

Privacy is increasingly going to be a luxury we can't afford for a variety of reasons... I'm just glad I'll be dead long before that really becomes the here and now.

What if the terrorist were able to execute this same hypothetical attack because they got the information necessary using the these same spying tools the government wants to force Apple to create. Seems preventable. Is the outcry somehow less justified?

Since when is privacy not also something that can protect lives?

 

[Scerpi]

Legally.
And that's the age we live in.
People -wait, scratch that, terrorist pieces of shit- will be flying drones into stadiums in the next decade if not the next few years. That's the reality.

It's also a reality that if we want our authorities to protect us, some of our rights are gonna get cramped. The outcry would be deafening if an attack killed citizens and the government could have prevented it but didn't because terrorists deserve their privacy.

Privacy is increasingly going to be a luxury we can't afford for a variety of reasons... I'm just glad I'll be dead long before that really becomes the here and now.

Holy Shit... I really hope your opinions on privacy are not widely held.

Checks and Balances are absolutely required because history has shown time and time again that the lure of Abuse of Power is far too great, even under the best intentions.

 

[45ACP]

Legally.
And that's the age we live in.
People -wait, scratch that, terrorist pieces of shit- will be flying drones into stadiums in the next decade if not the next few years. That's the reality.

It's also a reality that if we want our authorities to protect us, some of our rights are gonna get cramped. The outcry would be deafening if an attack killed citizens and the government could have prevented it but didn't because terrorists deserve their privacy.

Privacy is increasingly going to be a luxury we can't afford for a variety of reasons... I'm just glad I'll be dead long before that really becomes the here and now.

It's legal for the feds to spy on foreign governments?

I see this all comes down to being scurred of islamic terrorism. You're so terrified of it you're willing to force private companies to provide our government with more tools that they will invariably use to spy on anyone they choose regardless of the protections and restrictions they agree to publicly.

My question to you is, where do you draw the line? Mandated random searches? Federally monitored security cameras in every home? How much privacy are you willing to give up for a false sense of security? Especially taking into account the fact that so far the government has failed miserably at preventing anything, even with all the power we've already handed over to them.

I mean if you have nothing to hide, what's the problem, right?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Holy Shit... I really hope your opinions on privacy are not widely held.

Checks and Balances are absolutely required because history has shown time and time again that the lure of Abuse of Power is far too great, even under the best intentions.

We're all used to standards of privacy and broadly interpreted rights that are probably going to see changes, it's simply fact.
Mostly because of the ability of enemies to be among us and commit anonymous atrocities, but also overpopulation (in the further future).

One could almost say that in the future privacy can be described as a fad that will no longer be affordable for most ordinary folks.
I hate it, but recognize that I was probably born into one of the last generations that will enjoy such luxury.
And it ain't our government doing this to us, place the blame where it belongs: on our enemies. They take advantage of our extreme views of what our rights and privacy expectations currently are.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

its funny how depending on who is in office, people will either support or condemn a program based on whether the party they support implemented it or not ... when the patriot act came into effect, everyone was like, yeah, this is awesome .. when snowden leaked stuff the nsa was doing, the right was like, man, they are spying on us and quoting shit like They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. that ben franklin said .. but if bush did that, it was for the greater good ... at the outset, it looks like apple is not complying to help fight terrorism, but in reality, they are protecting their customers rights ... if the fbi wants that information, they can get a warrant and get ... but what they are asking for is more than they need imo

 

[Level25Virgin]

He compromised the security of his own country, in violation of his oath, to broadcast information everybody knew anyways.
He should have his own prison cell.

Here's NSA director General Keith Alexander (2005-2014, thats during Bush's AND Obama's administrations for the partisan hacks) LYING to everyone at Defcon 2012 (annual hacker convention) about domestic bulk data collection (aka spying/invading privacy) of the American people.

Edward Snowden didn't blow the whistle on the govts domestic spying software and programs until 2013, and subsequently Defcon asked federal agents and officals not to attend that year (a first).

You're terribly, terribly misinformed or ignorant about the situation and should pull back on your idiotic opinions on the matter which are clearly not based in reality.

 

[D Train]

What wait? This is what this really about it? Remote access to anyone's phone, anytime?

No f'ing way, no how.

I did not get that impression from the news articles I've seen though. It seems that they unable to access the phone and are worried additional attempts will destroy data. This seems a far cry from remote access.

Perhaps I'm wrong. That's what I understood from a news report this morning.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

It's legal for the feds to spy on foreign governments?

No, but that doesn't stop even friendly nations spying on each other, as in the US and Israel catching each other's spies every few years. It's just the way it is. Frankly I'm surprised when people are surprised by this fact.

I see this all comes down to being scurred of islamic terrorism. You're so terrified of it you're willing to force private companies to provide our government with more tools that they will invariably use to spy on anyone they choose regardless of the protections and restrictions they agree to publicly.

Stand strong with your head held high.
But remember this next time there's a successful attack, especially if there's some corporation that won't cooperate with the ensuing investigation.

My question to you is, where do you draw the line? Mandated random searches? Federally monitored security cameras in every home? How much privacy are you willing to give up for a false sense of security? Especially taking into account the fact that so far the government has failed miserably at preventing anything, even with all the power we've already handed over to them.

I mean if you have nothing to hide, what's the problem, right?

These types of discussions always devolve into this sort of meaningless blather. The government doesn't have the time, manpower, or interest in what I'm doing with my time. They actually devote those resources to finding bad guys, which as anyone can see is hard enough already.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Here's NSA director General Keith Alexander (2005-2014, thats during Bush's AND Obama's administrations for the partisan hacks) LYING to everyone at Defcon 2012 (annual hacker convention) about domestic bulk data collection (aka spying/invading privacy) of the American people.

Edward Snowden didn't blow the whistle on the govts domestic spying software and programs until 2013, and subsequently Defcon asked federal agents and officals not to attend that year (a first).

You're terribly, terribly misinformed or ignorant about the situation and should pull back on your idiotic opinions on the matter which are clearly not based in reality.

Everybody knew there were data sweeps. Everybody.

 

[MusterX]

The issue many people don't take into account is The Feds can’t weaken encryption for terrorists without weakening it for everyone.

The simultaneously call for tools and laws to weaken it while the director of the CIA's email gets hacked by a teenager. Every week I hear about a massive data leak/breach. BOA just called me last week to tell me they are mailing a new CC to me because they had another massive breach, yet governments across the world want to make it even easier. Even though we know terrorists and nations that are our enemies will get their hands on the same tools and use it against US citizens.

They can't really weaken the encryption. Its 32 bit or 64 bit and its unbreakable. What they can do is request service provider backdoors and break passwords. These breaches you hear about are due to password breaks. Stronger passwords and 32 bit encryption are impregnable. You have to try to understand that the geeks of the world created a system that is unbreakable and out of reach of law enforcement. If you encrypt your drives not even the service provider, manufacturer or law enforcement can get in.

Now what you have to realize is that the U.S. governement is not interested in making things easier for them to spy on possible terrorists while leaving your security and privacy strong. They want it all, its a true Big Brother state. Having all the data is like crack to them. They will not easily surrender that sort of power and even if they say they stopped, you can bet your ass they didn't.

 

[45ACP]

its funny how depending on who is in office, people will either support or condemn a program based on whether the party they support implemented it or not ... when the patriot act came into effect, everyone was like, yeah, this is awesome .. when snowden leaked stuff the nsa was doing, the right was like, man, they are spying on us and quoting shit like They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. that ben franklin said .. but if bush did that, it was for the greater good ... at the outset, it looks like apple is not complying to help fight terrorism, but in reality, they are protecting their customers rights ... if the fbi wants that information, they can get a warrant and get ... but what they are asking for is more than they need imo

There were plenty of people, myself included, who not only vocally disapproved of the so-called "Patriot Act" but wrote our representatives pleading with them to fight against it.

It's called being principled.

I do see your point though, as there certainly are people like you describe, you were just painting with an awfully broad brush. Hypocrisy is surely nothing new when it comes to politics.

 

[MusterX]

Stand strong with your head held high.
But remember this next time there's a successful attack, especially if there's some corporation that won't cooperate with the ensuing investigation.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

 

[Jayzer193]

Long ago my people were chilling by a fire, eating some buffalo, telling some stories to each other, laughing and smiling. Then you guys came in, took over, making up laws and bullshit treaties that you had no problem breaking or changing, and now- whatever broken shell of a race my people have become- watch from the sidelines of reservations while you fist fuck and back stab each other and the land, like a bunch of gypsy tricksters, lying and stealing from each other. Trillions in debt, government scandal after scandal, laws and procedures changing by the month...lmfao, its like watching 20 hyenas eat a squirrel, yelping and biting each other. It's hilarious.

Whenever I hear anyone say "oh my god, I can't believe the government is doing THIS"- I just laugh- slap yourself. What, did you just get off off gilligans island? Shit has been going on since day one. "our civil rights and liberties, and the Constitution, and, waaahhhh....." Lmao.

I wish my ancestors had just like ONE cracken, for that first ship that hit land back in the day. "RELEASE THE CRACKEN" said chief so and so....lol

 

[ralphc1]

With a warrant police can take a phone to Apple and retrieve whatever data is covered by the warrant. That's always been the case. Now, the government wants to be able to remotely access phones.

As far as I know, this is about Apple unlocking one phone. Apple appears to be making it about more than that.

 

[45ACP]

These types of discussions always devolve into this sort of meaningless blather. The government doesn't have the time, manpower, or interest in what I'm doing with my time. They actually devote those resources to finding bad guys, which as anyone can see is hard enough already.

So you won't answer my question. You're most likely correct that the government doesn't give a shit about you, but that's missing the point.

If we installed video cameras in every home, legalized random searches, warrantless phone taps, etc, we'd probably catch a lot of terrorists, or at least make it much, much more difficult for them to operate, right?

So I'll ask again, where do you draw the line?

And what would you say if, after handing even more power over to the government, there are more terror attacks?

Finally, it takes some serious naivety to believe the government is only interested in expanding it's police state powers to protect you.

 

[ralphc1]

Soooo...

Nobody in this thread would ever consider protecting their own stuff with an auto-self-destruct application?

Not if there's no way to access it if I forget my password or the device is damaged so I can't enter my password.

 

[llperez22]

i wulod be 100% in favor of satellites dvr'ing everything minus inside of homes/offices. In doors should be off limits, but outdoors in public, fucking record everything and when someone dies or goes missing punch in the time and coordinates and solve that shit. I would only approve it's use in violent crimes, missing persons cases and traffic collisions where insurance fraud might be in play. No using for drugs, prostitution or basic traffic violations. Im not one of these scared people that worries about the government. Go catch bad guys and make the world a safer place. If you seeing me be glutenous while eating taco bell in the parking lot or seeing me try and hook up with some chick while my girlfriend is away, so be it. If the government has that much time on their hands i feel soory for them.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

It was the dumbest thing he ever said.
Of course every citizen deserves the protection of the state, regardless of their opinions.
Nobody should ever trot out that brainless quote again, his legacy would be better off for it.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

So you won't answer my question. You're most likely correct that the government doesn't give a shit about you, but that's missing the point.

If we installed video cameras in every home, legalized random searches, warrantless phone taps, etc, we'd probably catch a lot of terrorists, or at least make it much, much more difficult for them to operate, right?

So I'll ask again, where do you draw the line?

And what would you say if, after handing even more power over to the government, there are more terror attacks?

Finally, it takes some serious naivety to believe the government is only interested in expanding it's police state powers to protect you.

We have cameras on street corners to catch traffic and other law breakers.
It's a knowing stretch between that, for example, and putting a camera in every home, which is sky-high rhetoric.

I don't feel that I'm adequately knowledgeable about the threats or the responses to those threats to be able to speculate about where lines should be drawn.
I only know that where the lines are NOW will seem antiquated sometime in the next century.

 

[llperez22]

It was the dumbest thing he ever said.
Of course every citizen deserves the protection of the state, regardless of their opinions.
Nobody should ever trot out that brainless quote again, his legacy would be better off for it.

thank you. I cringe everytime i hear someone use that quote.