FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
1–10 of 417 posts
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#2dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#3dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
what is on his phone that can't be found online or through his browsing history tracked by google et. al.? you have all his contacts as well through various nsa pen registers and whatnot.
seems like more or less a move to create a "think of the kids or innocents" moment to keep things from "going dark".
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#4dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
One could argue that it's harder to make an institution that has the power to access secured devices behave than it is to change society to have fewer mass murderers.
To quote the onion: ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#5dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
If there were clear and transparent -- like public -- procedures -- by which the FBI could get into an iPhone, it might be alright. Say that if they broke into the iPhone it was indelibly marked -- it flipped a flag in the hardware and there was no way to disguise it, and the OS would broadcast it over the web and over BlueTooth and WiFi, making it easy to provide tools that caught the message and published it. Then people lose their privacy, but only if the government is willing to defend in a credible way the necessity of it.
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#6dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
If there were clear and transparent -- like public -- procedures -- by which the FBI could get into an iPhone, it might be alright. Say that if they broke into the iPhone it was indelibly marked -- it flipped a flag in the hardware and there was no way to disguise it, and the OS would broadcast it over the web and over BlueTooth and WiFi, making it easy to provide tools that caught the message and published it. Then…
If I were a large entity trying to secretly access a device I think I would keep it in a Faraday cage.
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#7dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
If there were clear and transparent -- like public -- procedures -- by which the FBI could get into an iPhone, it might be alright. Say that if they broke into the iPhone it was indelibly marked -- it flipped a flag in the hardware and there was no way to disguise it, and the OS would broadcast it over the web and over BlueTooth and WiFi, making it easy to provide tools that caught the message and published it. Then…
No, it's not alright. I'm sick of giving up freedoms every time some violent psycho/group of psychos decided to commit more violence.
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#8dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?
One could argue that it's harder to make an institution that has the power to access secured devices behave than it is to change society to have fewer mass murderers. To quote the onion: ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
Yeah. Let’s take away a specifically enumerated constitutional right to better protect, maybe, one that appears only in the “penumbras” of the document.
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#9Hate to be that guy but anyone know any reason why articles about Marvin Minsky and Jefferey Epstein would not be showing up today on HN? Seems odd to me.
Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there were clear and transparent -- like public -- procedures -- by which the FBI could get into an iPhone, it might be alright. Say that if they broke into the iPhone it was indelibly marked -- it flipped a flag in the hardware and there was no way to disguise it, and the OS would broadcast it over the web and over BlueTooth and WiFi, making it easy to provide tools that caught the message and published it. Then…
If I were a large entity trying to secretly access a device I think I would keep it in a Faraday cage.
How about a dated signed explanation that had to passed around and signed by a bunch of public institutions. Heck, to keep other countries from complaining, some could be an international.