111–120 of 206 posts
This is our tax money down the drain by scaring us to death for fear of non-existent terrorist threat. It is remarkable how such FBI directors don't get fired from their job.
I'm not entirely sure how you can call 14 deaths "non-existent".
Given that they found no relevant information on his work phone, exactly as experts and reasonable amateurs and common men predicted, how was it "worth it" as he claims? Is it that wasting huge sums of taxpayer money while attacking civil rights and attempting to instantiate a police surveillance state with no privacy is simply "worth it" no matter what, even if pointless?
It was worth it because they didn't know that beforehand. Now the FBI are sure that the attackers weren't in contact with other ISIS members. The FBI thinks that information is worth the $1.2M+ they paid. How could they possibly have known that without unlocking the phone?
Umm, no - no they aren't. Not even close. The terrorists personal phones were destroyed before the FBI could recover them, this was just a 'work phone'.
Don't you think it's likely that a) there is a reason they destroyed their personal phones, and b) if they were going to communicate with other actors they'd be more likely to use the phone that's completely under their control?
I wish people who paid lots of government money for things were always forced to do so out of their salary. For example: we will pay you $X per year in exchange for giving you the responsibility to make up to 10 big purchases; each time you purchase however, 1% of the proposed sum comes out of that $X salary; now then, how judicious will you be? One thing Ron Paul did in Congress years ago, after one of those stupid…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And he made a series of public statements which made it clear he had no understanding whatsoever of the technical issues involved. First, he claimed that he would use "social engineering" to access the phone's data. Later, he claimed that he could do it easily by clearing the area of flash memory containing the phone's password, apparently unaware of the fact that the password was used as a key to encrypt data. Sourc…
Social engineering could plausibly work against Apple employees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what sense of ownership?
Public funds purchased the phone. I'm not sure what you mean?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Americans need to wake up to the fact that these spooks simply cannot be trusted. The very concept of trust is alien to their culture. Would be nice of we could count on congress to provide adequate oversight.
That won't happen unless American voters want it. They don't want it, as evidenced by their not voting for it, so they won't get it.
Instead of a pithy but pointless HN comment, let me suggest a book for you that might expand your thinking on this topic:
http://www.thriftbooks.com/w/do-elections-matter/1470236/?gc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Public funds purchased the phone. I'm not sure what you mean?
The phone is evidence in a police investigation, they didn't buy it, while its owners are dead surely it belongs to their hiers? or does that whole rule of law thing mean nothing