"The FBI request is NARROW, it is FOCUSED, and it is for something that does not harm, change, or any way backdoor the encryption."
The FBI request is narrowly focused on bypassing an important security feature that makes the encryption effective. The encryption will be irrelevant if the passcode can be so easily hacked. Arguing that this in not backdooring the encryption is a lame semantic point. The effect is exactly the same.
"The special OS patch (because it will be just a minor patch) won't get rolled out every Apple phone in the world. The small change (likely something to reset an attempt counter back to zero every couple of milliseconds) is just that, a small change to a single phone."
Once again, you look very foolish sticking to this very early claim that most people, even those on the government's side, now realize is completely false. Hard to take you seriously when you keep repeating it with such conviction.
Your Apple hatred is getting really tiring. You offer nothing to the discussion except attacks on Apple, completely missing the bigger, far more important issues.
"Too bad you aren't as critical of Apple's overhyped claims."
Not a single Apple claim was made in the article. Instead there were quotes from actual crypto and security experts. When are you going to get over your Apple issues and start trying to argue against their claims?
"See, the problem is they are correct and honest if you take the assumption that FBiOS would be rolled out to everyone phone in the world. It will not (Apple controls the universe). So the scare factor they are rolling out is about something that does not exist."
Nobody credible has claimed that. Your entire argument is based on a gross falsehood. What a waste of your time...
"Apple has gone over the top on this and they are lying to you outright."
Feel free to offer any proof of that. In the mean time ignore Apple and listen to the countless security experts and other tech companies who have explained in great detail why this is such a bad idea. Let's hear you try to refute all of their claims as well.
"The FBI has not asked Apple to roll out an new OS for everyone. They haven't told them to put a back door on every phone. They are asking for a single device to be made more accessible."
It's extraordinary that anyone would still be trotting out the "just one phone" line at this point. That one has been so well and truly debunked that even law enforcement has stopped claiming that.
"So the question is actually what is worse: destroying the kids lives through sexual abuse or insane law enforcement?"
There is no equivalence in this case. Sexting is not "sexual abuse" and the potential for long-term harm to minors from sexting is far less than the harm from being forcefully dragged through the legal system and coming out the other side as a registered sex offender.
"It's insanely small, but the point is still valid."
The law does not look fondly on "insanely small" chances when issuing warrants and other enforcement orders, or at least it's not supposed to. This makes the point moot, not valid.
"any encryption that's protected by a five digit pin is not secure."
On it's own, you're correct, which is why Apple built in the very safeguards the court is now trying to force them to disable. It's almost like you haven't read any of the many articles explaining this...
Of course it's also possible the dead user of this particular phone felt the same way you do, and didn't keep any sensitive data on the phone. That's what makes this such an over-reaching fishing expedition. The potential downsides are enormous, but it might well be for zero gain.
It's also possible they recorded over the tapes with other work to save money, like the BBC did with a lot of the earlier Dr Who episodes. That's a pretty overt act too.
A tattoo is no less fixed than a painting, book, video/audio recording, digital file, etc, that be all be damaged or destroyed either in a moment or with time.
"The problem is, in the case of an actual active-shooter or hostage situation, restraint is really the last thing you want them to show."
Fair enough, but first they should have to determine if there really is an actual active-shooter or hostage situation. Until that's decided by professional LEO's, not unreliable or malicious "witnesses", restraint should absolutely be shown.
"Karl, you need to learn that the SnarkMaker App you are using allows you to adjust the settings so your attempts at being snarky aren't quite so obvious and overdone."
On the post: John Oliver Explains Why You Should Side With Apple Over The FBI Better Than Most Journalists
Re: Re:
The FBI request is narrowly focused on bypassing an important security feature that makes the encryption effective. The encryption will be irrelevant if the passcode can be so easily hacked. Arguing that this in not backdooring the encryption is a lame semantic point. The effect is exactly the same.
"The special OS patch (because it will be just a minor patch) won't get rolled out every Apple phone in the world. The small change (likely something to reset an attempt counter back to zero every couple of milliseconds) is just that, a small change to a single phone."
Once again, you look very foolish sticking to this very early claim that most people, even those on the government's side, now realize is completely false. Hard to take you seriously when you keep repeating it with such conviction.
On the post: John Oliver Explains Why You Should Side With Apple Over The FBI Better Than Most Journalists
Re:
On the post: President Obama Is Wrong On Encryption; Claims The Realist View Is 'Absolutist'
Re:
Not a single Apple claim was made in the article. Instead there were quotes from actual crypto and security experts. When are you going to get over your Apple issues and start trying to argue against their claims?
On the post: Apple Engineering VP: The FBI Wants Us To Make Everyone Less Safe
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody credible has claimed that. Your entire argument is based on a gross falsehood. What a waste of your time...
On the post: Apple Engineering VP: The FBI Wants Us To Make Everyone Less Safe
Re: Re:
Feel free to offer any proof of that. In the mean time ignore Apple and listen to the countless security experts and other tech companies who have explained in great detail why this is such a bad idea. Let's hear you try to refute all of their claims as well.
"The FBI has not asked Apple to roll out an new OS for everyone. They haven't told them to put a back door on every phone. They are asking for a single device to be made more accessible."
It's extraordinary that anyone would still be trotting out the "just one phone" line at this point. That one has been so well and truly debunked that even law enforcement has stopped claiming that.
On the post: New Mexico Attorney General Would Rather See Sexting Teens Treated As Sex Offenders Than See His Funding 'Jeopardized'
Re:
There is no equivalence in this case. Sexting is not "sexual abuse" and the potential for long-term harm to minors from sexting is far less than the harm from being forcefully dragged through the legal system and coming out the other side as a registered sex offender.
On the post: Full Brief From San Bernardino District Attorney Even More Insane Than Application About 'Dormant Cyber Pathogen'
Re:
The law does not look fondly on "insanely small" chances when issuing warrants and other enforcement orders, or at least it's not supposed to. This makes the point moot, not valid.
On the post: Don't Believe The Hype: No, Apple HAS NOT Done What The FBI Now Wants '70 Times' Before
Re: Re:
You're exactly the kind of ignorant shmuck this article was written to educate.
On the post: Don't Believe The Hype: No, Apple HAS NOT Done What The FBI Now Wants '70 Times' Before
Re: Re: Re:
On it's own, you're correct, which is why Apple built in the very safeguards the court is now trying to force them to disable. It's almost like you haven't read any of the many articles explaining this...
Of course it's also possible the dead user of this particular phone felt the same way you do, and didn't keep any sensitive data on the phone. That's what makes this such an over-reaching fishing expedition. The potential downsides are enormous, but it might well be for zero gain.
On the post: Verizon Gives Net Neutrality A Giant Middle Finger, Exempts Own Video Service From Wireless Usage Caps
Re: Re: Re: No Suprise
If it was possible to vote someone out you'd have a stronger argument. But you can't, you can only hope to vote a different turd in, who may be worse.
On the post: Ridiculous Copyright Fight Still Keeping The Only Video Of The First Super Bowl Locked Up
Re:
On the post: Take-Two Software Sued Over Copyright On NBA Players' Tattoos
Re:
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re:
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re: Re: Re: That's not a root cause.
Fair enough, but first they should have to determine if there really is an actual active-shooter or hostage situation. Until that's decided by professional LEO's, not unreliable or malicious "witnesses", restraint should absolutely be shown.
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Which is completely irrelevant in a discussion about how people will react (or over-react) to a perceived threat from someone carrying a gun.
"If I want to walk around with a rifle over my shoulder, I am entitled by the constitution to have that right."
If you want to walk around with a rifle over your shoulder, you're not entitled by the constitution to choose how people will react to you.
On the post: The Cable Industry Is Absolutely Terrified Of Set Top Box Competition
Re:
Please tell me the irony here was deliberate...
On the post: The Shittiness Of IP Law Has Taught The Public That Everything Is Stealing And Everyone Is Owed Something
Re: Re:
But Average Joe thought copyright was wonderful!
On the post: Nest Thermostat Goes From 'Internet Of Things' Darling To Cautionary Tale
Re:
On the post: South Carolina Politicians Propose Ridculous Plan To Register Journalists... To Make A Statement About Gun Control
Re: Re: Re: If the Pen is mightier than sword - should it be registered?
Can you point to evidence of journalists "destroying" over 30,000 lives in one year? I think your claim may be out by a couple of orders of magnitude.
On the post: 'More Realistic' Modelling Of TPP's Effects Predicts 450,000 US Jobs Lost, Contraction Of Economy
Re: Re:
Why do so many people struggle with obvious hyperbole?
Next >>