Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 261 posts

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#41

Post by randyrand »

stephenitis wrote: post #14
ComputerGuru wrote: post #11

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

Would "Terrorist User's" have been better?

"MS backs Apple in debate over phone unlocking"

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#42

Post by randyrand »

TorKlingberg wrote: post #29
ComputerGuru wrote: post #11

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

Well, "over terrorist's phone" is enough to tell me which issue it is referring to. "Over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI" would not, and honestly feel more editorialized.

"over phone unlocking"

Anyone that has seen the case would know what its talking about. Anyone that hasn't can read the article. "over phone unlocking" is a more descriptive title for the case.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#43

Post by revelation »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #11

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

Sure the case isn't perfect, but is it ever going to be, given that the government can choose it?

The details of this case, however, aren't too detrimental. Basically, a couple buys guns, goes next door and starts shooting. It's then a terrorism case, because... well their name sounds arabic and possibly the guy visited some internet pages.

For me, this case only demonstrates that if you make guns available for purchase in every supermarket, chances are that one day a mental person wakes up, buys one and just starts shooting. And there's really not very much you can do about that. But there isn't a smoking gun hidden here that would somehow make a strong emotional argument towards compelling Apple to decrypt the phone of a dead guy.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#44

Post by rayiner »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #11

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

Those aren't neutral headlines either. The first presupposes that Apple's assistance with this specific phone will endanger all users' privacy. The second characterizes what is in most cases routine cooperation with legal process as "conscription."

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#45

Post by samstave »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #11

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

What about a dead-mans switch app on any phone where if you dont type in the code within a time definable to you - the phone shall be wiped?

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#46

Post by SapphireSun »

oldmanjay wrote: post #30
0942v8653 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. "Terrorist's Phone" is simply the most efficient way to identify the case. "User's Privacy" would mean absolutely nothing to someone who hasn't heard of the case as much as we have, especially considering most of Apple's marketing nowadays is through that lens… > The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. If you'll allow me to be pedantic, they…

I'm not sure that it's easy to dismiss political bias as coincidental given that the people publishing the article are professional wordsmiths who understand the impact of every word they choose.

There's an easier explanation.

"...around user privacy." Boring. No one will click that. "...against federal conscription." Sounds like a conspiracy rag. "...terrorist phone." Interesting! Let's click.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#50

Post by r00fus »

FussyZeus wrote: post #5
wheaties wrote: post #2

Wow, so brilliant to have Bill Gates so he's pro-government intrusion and then the company back Apple. Update: This was not meant to troll. I fell for the mis-attributed quotes to Bill and thought he actually backed the FBI. I stand corrected.

Also Gates consults with Microsoft occasionally and is a large stakeholder but that does not mean Gates speaks for Microsoft, or that Microsoft speaks for Gates. In fact, they disagree pretty regularly.

As a founder and member of the BoD, he's likely on-par with Nadella on overall influence over Microsoft's strategy.

Don't downplay Gates' influence.

Post reply on HN