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.
Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
71–80 of 261 posts
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#72Notice 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…
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…
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#73They think they are safe. That's the whole point.
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#74Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#75Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#76Trump will now have to boycott Apple, Google, FB and Microsoft.
I guess Trump will have to buy one of the discontinued BB10 devices...
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#77Privacy is important but as with any rule, there has too be exceptions and I would say clear lives at stake would be one case.
But equaly the way things work and setting precidence, I can totally understand Apples and those supporting it's stance as the way things work in law is once the door is open, its a lot harder to close it. If better prevision without blanket abuse and a case by case basis could be approved and not set some blanket level of privacy abuse then again many would be happier.
Alas it is the way the government has approached this in that they would be in effect given a way that could be used with this but any other such devices at no need to even speak with Apple that is the real crux I feel.
We agree terroisim and indeed impacting others life spans is not the types of crimes we want hiding behind encryption or law, be that individuals or goverments themselves. But in a World in which such terroisim definitions and associated laws have and are being used on a scale and definition that trancends what a terroist is, then the element of suspicion and mistrust on the use of the term to jsutify any law or action comes more and more under public scrutiny and concerns of how it will be abused more than it should.
So an area that is very much dammed if you do and potential dammed if you do no equally. But for now Apple as others equally say are making the right moves, albeit II hope a fair and acceptable compromise is established and no blanket precedence that does more harm than good goes thru.
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#78http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/us/politics/obama-wont-see...
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#79Earlier 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…
Why not just "phone"? Terrorism shouldn't have anything to do with the case. I don't believe the fourth amendment makes a special provision for terrorists or other "scary" people. For a good reason—terrorism is a polemic term.
It's also more descriptive for people who may be hearing about the story for the first time. Personally, I call it the San Bernardino iPhone case.
Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case
#80From recent polls most people think this debate is about: "Should Apple be forced to give the Terrorist's phone data to the FBI" When what it's really about: "Should the FBI be able to compel technology companies to use their resources against their own and their Customers right to Security." In order for the public to be properly informed about what's really at stake this case needs to be about the "Technology Indus…
For europe and the rest of the world, the answer was a resounding YES by the american government, their intelligence agencies and the american people at large, and it came years ago. So, this is not about their customers or their rights or any other abstract moral universals (which are valid only within the US). I wouldn't read too much into it, although i think it has to do with an attempt to restore the shattered image of US companies to their international audience.