Apple...

Discussion in 'Politics Discussion' started by hawksfan9325, Feb 20, 2016.

  1. hawksfan9325

    hawksfan9325 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2015
    Posts:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, the question of the week is should $AAPL assist the US government in it's investigation into the encrypted ****** 5C of shooter Sayed Farook, or stand tall and not give in?

    I feel that this is a scapegoat for the government to continually gain more and more access to our data and information. Apple is doing the right thing. The biggest cause of terrorism whether it be radical jihadism or a white christian is mental health issues, weak immigration, and lack of enforcement of current gun laws.

    Thanks for input guys :)
     
  2. Troponin

    Troponin Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 2016
    Posts:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's a slippery slope. I don't trust our government with any kind of information like that. Many years ago, when we didn't have the Patriot Act and other "anti terrorist" laws, I may have said "What's the big deal". However, once that door is open, with the laws we have in place today, the FBI, and other agencies, no longer need warrants. The criteria has become too general, allowing abuse of the system.
     
  3. baudwalk

    baudwalk Senior Investor

    Joined:
    May 2015
    Posts:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    13
    The simple solution is, with a court order, is to get on a plane and go to Cupertino. Companies should not provide government with defacto jailbreaking back door entry to corporate products. Vincent in NYC held an asinine press conference last week touting a litany of small crimes, insisting on such access. Absolute idiocy. Bullfeathers. My financial and medical records and contacts are mine. Stay the h--- out of my stuff.
     
  4. eddiemoneys

    eddiemoneys Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2016
    Posts:
    91
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with you @baudwalk and @troponin they need to stay out of your devices and your private space, and there's no room for negotiation on that.

    @hawksfan9325 Eh, gun laws you say? You're joking, right? Gun laws have never helped do anything but put the people without them at risk. This is proven by the fact that any staged or real events concerning guns have happened in Gun Free Zones, because people who want to misuse guns never follow the laws you make for them. Only the law abiding people who own guns do, and that's what gets them killed along with the liberals who don't know better or know enough to own one to save their own life.

    I don't believe that a strong imagination or anything less makes for terrorism. What is terrorism anyway? Whatever the government does not like while it is terrorizing other countries? Whatever their allies do to people to which a blind eye is turned, while anything done even in 1% to them is an atrocity? Can you explain that double standard?

    Considering the fact that Sandy Hook was outed as an event to stage gun control laws in the US (not even a real school in use for over a year, and all the people there who acted out the event got free houses and real estate in the neighborhood), and the current sham of a president we have is trying to stage as many as he can to get them away from people who own them legally, it seems to me that liberal gun-grabbers are the ones who have mental health problems more than the boogey man terrorists they want people to believe in whenever it is convenient for them to point their finger that way.

    As for the privacy violations and what the government is trying to do, we do agree on that.

    What Apple, LinkedIn, and other companies are trying to prevent is the overreach of power by the FBI in this case. This is not just about one Apple phone. This is about being able to decrypt all the apple phones whenever they want, for any reason, and without restriction.

    It's like getting a search warrant for a business location. If someone is renting out a business space, then the owner of that 1000 sqft or so has to comply with the request to search just that area.

    But what happens if they decide that the one warrant can be used to blatantly and illegally search all legal business spaces in the city that that realtor owns and rents out, simply because a search was allowed for "a" property owned by that realtor, and it extends to being "every" property by that realtor? What then?

    Not that any mobile device is safe to use now, but if they do this it's going to get a whole lot more unsafe than it ever was before for everyone, whether they're a CEO or a customer. The tracking and intrusion will be astronomical.
     
  5. kgord

    kgord Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Aug 2015
    Posts:
    617
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, it would be interesting to hear your opinions after your friends and relatives are killed in a terror attack. My opinion is that anything that will help keep us safe from being killed is fair game. I think Apple could do this in a small way, without the news media splashing this all over the place. Lets try to keep some things quiet...can't we folks?? We need to fight terrorism by any means necessary...IMHO. OK so maybe your data isn't quite as safe,,,it isn't really safe now!
     
  6. Rainman

    Rainman Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Jun 2014
    Posts:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    4
    The FBI shouldn't be demanding that they get software that will be used to "hack" not just that one phone but as many they'd want. In any case someone already made an offer to decrypt the device for them. If all they wanted was the data that was on the phone they should accept that offer but apparently since they want more access they'll still prefer to face Apple in court and hope that the judges order Apple to make the software the FBI wants.
     
  7. Alex

    Alex Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2015
    Posts:
    634
    Likes Received:
    3
    The whole story came to light when it became a court case, that an individual had messed up the password by changing it without permission and blocked the phone. They did not tell the FBI this until the case was revealed. It throws a slightly different light on the matter, that was negligence with the department who had the phone and held it as evidence, and that it was blocked because of the password change. If that hadn't happened this 'back door' may not have been necessary.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/san-bernar...passcode-changed-government/story?id=37066070
     
  8. SteakTartare

    SteakTartare Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Mar 2014
    Posts:
    857
    Likes Received:
    11
    ^ This. Apple should comply with every legal court order and be as helpful to law enforcement as possible in that regard. But opening a huge security hole for every government snoop, and I might add potentially non-state actors, to exploit is just lunacy. If we've learned anything in recent years, the snooping has gotten positively Orwellian. Giving them any more quarter is too much.
     
  9. petesede

    petesede Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 2014
    Posts:
    991
    Likes Received:
    2
    The problem is just precedence. Once Apple is forced to do this for ´terrorism´.. how long until they are forced to do it for murder.... then rape.. then drug deals etc. Pretty soon every petty crime and they will have access.

    I think my solution for Apple is this. When the gov´t gets a court order for them to create something that doesn´t already exist.. they hire a bunch of hire school students for that project. Look, we have 20 people working on breaking into our own phones... it could be awhile.. kthxbye! But seriously, as long as Apple doesn´t leave a paper trail where they say they are purposefully dragging their feet, there is no way the gov´t can give them a timetable to create something that has never been done before. Is the gov´t also going to dictate how many engineers they need to assign to the project?
     
  10. pwarbi

    pwarbi Senior Investor

    Joined:
    May 2015
    Posts:
    1,028
    Likes Received:
    5
    I'm kind of on the fence on this one, and while I do think the government have the right to expect Apple to help in their investigation, it will set a precedent and one that can't be revoked.

    I don't trust the government not to access our information as and when they want if Apple do decide to create this back door, but if it's going to help in this case, then can Apple stick to their guns and refuse the request? I'm not sure even Apple are powerful enough to do that.
     

Share This Page