On Mar 8, 2016, landmark wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 8, 2016, slowkneenuh wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 1, 2016, landmark wrote:

But where's the rest of the info? You've left out filling in many of the blanks. You have nothing to hide.

Everyone has something to hide, but some of us are smart enough not to put it on our phones.

The point here is the lameness of the "nothing to hide" argument. Just because one has "nothing to hide" (a dubious proposition to begin with), doesn't mean that we are thus willing to have our personal info available to everyone.

There's an even larger, much more interesting, and beautiful argument in favor of privacy that Glenn Greenwald has delineated in some of his articles and books, but it's not really amenable to summary in this kind of venue.

This case seems to have become a proxy for the larger debate re: privacy versus security measures, but courts are only supposed to look at the unique facts before them in a specific case. Under that analysis, there's really no privacy issue here at all.

Now, apparently, the FBI is in possession of a technique to hack Apple phones, which might not have occured if Apple had just complied in the beginning, and opened the phone without giving the keys to the FBI.

On Mar 28, 2016, landmark wrote:

Quote:

This case seems to have become a proxy for the larger debate re: privacy versus security measures, but courts are only supposed to look at the unique facts before them in a specific case. Under that analysis, there's really no privacy issue here at all.

Now, apparently, the FBI is in possession of a technique to hack Apple phones, which might not have occured if Apple had just complied in the beginning, and opened the phone without giving the keys to the FBI.

Disagree on both counts. The FBI's former "solution" would indeed have set a precedent for allphones. It would not have been just that specific phone whose securty would have been compromised, but all phones.

As for the FBI suddenly finding a new method--Ed Snowden said all along that the FBI was lying and knew that there were known techniques, which the NSA already had, to access info in such a situation.

Finally the dichotomy of privacy versus security is a false dichotomy. In a free society, the public sector is supposed to be transparent, and the private sector...uhh...private.

That might not have happened if Apple had opened the phone and kept the code to itself, which is all it was asked to do.

On Mar 28, 2016, MaxfieldsMagic wrote:

As for Snowden, he defected to Russia...

On Mar 28, 2016, landmark wrote:

Quote:

That might not have happened if Apple had opened the phone and kept the code to itself, which is all it was asked to do.

You need to familiarize yourself with the facts of the case. That was not what Apple was requested to do.

Snowden's thoughts are extraordinarily relevant since he had first hand knowledge of the capabilities of the NSA--so he knew the FBI was lying as indeed it was proven. Of course not just Snowden , but pretty much the entire informed tech world said the same thing.

If the FBI could've unlocked this phone without a huge public debate, it would have done so quietly.

On Mar 29, 2016, lunatik wrote:
There are definitely people here that support privacy over public safety.....at any cost, to include innocent lives. They would probably even justify their own family's lives being lost to keep that privacy.