What freedom? The phone was owned by the San Bernardino government. The terrorist had no expectation of privacy. This is Apple posturing.
Yes the phone was owned by the county and they PAID for software to unlock it but didn’t bother to install it! Now they want to force Apple to make a key that doesn’t exist so they can get into everyone’s phone not just the one phone that they have a warrant for.
I agree. How do we propose ending terrorism (and crime for that matter) if we continue to uphold the privacy rights of terrorists/criminals? So stupid…
Personally, I think this is all just a big PR stunt for Apple to look like the hero.
@SlitheyTove The government already has access to your financial and medical record so…
I side with Apple. I too think this is the FBI using a high profile case to get access it wants on a larger scale.
“The government knows better than the people in my opinion. They know about the things that threaten your livelihood that you are completely unaware of. There are many cases where they stop bad things before they happen and you have no clue.”
There is no doubt that in its role of protecting us, the government knows things people don’t know, can’t know (either because of possibility of panic, or tipping off the bad guys), but that argument has one fatal flaw, it assumes that the power to prevent crime will not be used for other things. Governments all through history have grabbed power by telling the people that there is an emergency and therefore they needed to do these things, the USSR did this pretty much their entire span of power.
Someone said that you are a student, @CaliCash, and that may explain things a bit. You are too young to have experienced or talked to people who experienced things like the McCarthy era (and it should be chilling to note that conservatives have been trying to redeem McCarthy and his tactics in recent years), or at the time when all the revelations about J.Edgar Hoover came out. When you assume good will on the part of the government, you are not looking at the record of governments and more important, what people in government do with the power they get. Some people are honorable public servants, others like Hoover turn into dictators who use every bit of their power to maintain and grow their base. For example, the FBI until the early 60’s had exactly one agent on organized crime, it wasn’t until the Valachi papers were published that the public realized how big the mob had become…and want to know why? It is very likely the Mob had dirt on Hoover (primarily him being gay), and used it to blackmail him…and Hoover, because of all the dirt he had on other people, was able to suppress any attempt to go after the mob. In other cases, Hoover used his power to destroy not just political opponents, but to go after people simply who had different political ideas than he did, the record of the FBI and CIA with civil rights groups was appalling. If there is one thing people in power want to do, it is to enhance and grow it, and there are a lot of people willing to do that no matter the means.
Not to mention that something like the Apple hack, if possible, would likely make its way, if not to hackers, to people like the Chinese government, unless your head has been buried in the sand someplace, the largest source of breakins to corporate computers are centered around the Chinese government, you think they wouldn’t offer a king’s ransom for something like this?
Yes, the government if they want to already has access to a lot of information on its citizens, just having a SS # means they can find out a lot about you, and it is somewhat naive on people’s parts to assume that they can ever be totally private. For most people it won’t matter, because most people quite frankly don’t interest the government…until they have reason to get interested, for whatever reason.
It is why it is important that any attempt to increase the power, like with the Apple thing, or with meta data programs like the NSA’s, has to be vetted, and the problem with the secret programs is often they aren’t, agencies like the FBI and NSA have in recent years been given a lot of latitude, because of the fear of terrorism, and there has been no one there. There is an old expression that holds true, and it asks “who is watching the watchers?” Most people in their lives won’t notice and what they don’t realize is how much this kind of data gathering could affect them, if tangentially. For example, a political figure loses an election, because someone at the NSA is told by a superior to dig up dirt on that figure, or blackmailing them into doing what some powerful figure wants, and that person isn’t there to vote down a bill giving massive subsidies to companies sending jobs to China, and Joe Smith suddenly loses his job, a bill that would have provided job training is defeated, and a region that would have benefitted suffers.
I am not one of the people who wants to see ‘the gov’nment gone’, far from it, but I also know the kind of abuses governments can do, and arguing “well, I have nothing to fear” is self centric, and also leaves out, kind of like all those mysterious programs that supposedly keep us safe, that you don’t know the things that have been done that harm people, political blackmail that can result in all kinds of things. When you assume the government knows best, you are buying into the notion that somehow everyone working for the government has the best interests of people in mind, believe in the rule of law, and also are playing into the oldest power game known “give me your rights, and I’ll keep you safe”, it has been the modus operandi of disparate power bases from the Roman Empire, to the medieval Church, to banana republic dictators.
@CaliCash
“Just how sometimes kids don’t know what best for themselves, sometimes the people are too ignorant to see the bigger picture and the difficult job of the government.”
It’s an error to assume that any government knows more or better. Citizens aren’t children. Any educated, reflective individual can easily imagine a wide range of types of security threats. Of course, specific events are and many will remain unknown, don’t need to be known. You give your power away when you think that other’s or entities know better. What makes you think your mind is so limited? Undoubtedly, the average government employee is no smarter than you are, the politicians aren’t … that’s for sure. … When you read ‘protect’ translate to ‘profit from’ you. ‘Secret’ translates to ‘control’. The most common manipulation by entities is to suggest or imply that there is a mystery, a secret knowledge or ability that they have and you don’t that makes them wiser. Many believe this and follow … There is no secret, no special power or knowledge or ability, never has been, never will be. There’s just us. That’s all there is. The government has a job which we gave them. They are our employees.
I side with Apple.
So burn the hack to a CD and store it somewhere secure. Who said there needs to be a copy of the software on a computer connected to the internet where hackers can get to it?
If China really wanted it, they could just bribe an unethical Apple employee to create a hack for them. The only difference here is that the software hack would be referred to in future tense rather than past tense.
Why would China need to go to that length? They can order Apple to provide that backdoor to investigate iPhones in their country. If Apple doesn’t comply they will be thrown out of the China market.
“If China really wanted it, they could just bribe an unethical Apple employee to create a hack for them. The only difference here is that the software hack would be referred to in future tense rather than past tense.”
It wouldn’t be that easy, that assumes that a project like this could involve one person, which is doubtful. To create such a back door is not a simple hack, on an iphone it involves both hardware and software from what I can tell (there is a unique key on each phone). It would take a group of people to do it. Potentially they could bribe an Apple employee to give them the specs, but that isn’t easy, either.
Once it is created, though, it would be a lot easier for a single employee or government employee to pass it along, if not the unit, the docs on it.
“Why would China need to go to that length? They can order Apple to provide that backdoor to investigate iPhones in their country. If Apple doesn’t comply they will be thrown out of the China market.”
A couple of reasons, one is if they made that demand publicly, it would generate bad publicity for them, something believe it or not they care about. Secondly, it also could become a matter for international trade organizations, where such a request could be considered something China was doing was to find a way to force Apple out of the Chinese market, it would be an excuse. Likely, if China actually did that, it would end up where there would be two versions of the phone, one with a backdoor for the Chinese market, one for the US and other parts of the world.
Much better to do it in stealth, they could have the access with none of the negative publicity. And the reality is, if Apple never makes such a hack, there is nothing to steal.
I don’t understand what you mean by “the people”. The government * is * made up of the people. It is not a giant computer that carries out tasks; it is made up of people who, like anybody, have their failings. They went to college, like you, they eat and sleep, like you, and they have their strengths and weaknesses, like you. @mreapoe got it right, they are your employees. They are there to help and serve you and themselves, not rule you.
The idea of the state as parent is a troubling one, for a number of reasons, assuming “government knows best” is as @infinityman said, a bit ridiculous in a country like ours that is by the people, for the people and of the people, to quote lincoln. That doesn’t mean that the average citizen is necessarily equipped to deal with the things the government, especially the security apparatus, have to handle, but the obverse is not true,that the government necessarily knows best or always operates in a way that is best. Assuming that the government always operates with best intentions is to leave out that that government is made up of ‘ordinary citizens’ , some of whom have ulterior motives (like a J.Edgar Hoover), others who do things believing they are doing the right thing, when they may not be (for example, someone in the government who believes a law being passed needs to be passed for ‘the good of all’, so uses their position to gain dirt on those opposed to the law, to force them to vote for it), then you have the maniacs who come to believe they are God or something and will do anything they need to to achieve their aims.
In this country, we talk about the checks and balances of the government, how the executive, judiciary and congress check and balance each other…there is a 4th factor, the people, and that needs to be a check as well, to make sure, for example, that the branches of government are doing their duty, and in doing that, it is absolutely important that we the people keep the government honest, too.
FBI. The had a court order and Apple chose to ignore it. If they choose to litigate the order they have the right to do so but to disregard an order is not good.
Huh? Those two statements make no sense to me.
The order is from a Magistrate judge. Her order can easily be overturned by the next higher court. It will likely be appealed to the Supreme Court. If Apple wins at the Supreme Court level, would your conclusion today be the same?
@mreapoe I don’t think my mind is limited. I just know that I do not have the capabilities to fight a terrorist attack. I don’t believe in government dependency, but I do depend on the government for safety.
Apple. I don’t see how they can be compelled to create something that does not exist.
Just a gut check here…would your opinion change if the company in question was exxon and not a hip cool company like apple?
Or if it was a phone from a dead 9/11 hijacker?
Ah, but that’s not what the FBI is asking, is it now? They are not asking for a way to only access the shooter’s phone, they are asking for a way to access * everybody’s * phone. Which - if we follow through with your analogy - would mean hacking into the phones of the innocent people of NYC right after 9/11. Pretty poor way to treat victims of a terrorist attack, IMO.
So you can make that claim for every criminal investigation.