Apparently not a question chrys wants to consider. Must not be a "win" in it.
lain:I understand.
Seems tailor made to bring out the middling dems and moderates, which doesn't feel like a good thing for the right wing. We'll see.
rep thread
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
Apparently not a question chrys wants to consider. Must not be a "win" in it.
lain:
good morning
good morning
it will be ugly
it already is
it will divide us
we are already divided
elections have consequences
the last one was 2014 and we won the senate
it will energize the democrats in november
it will also bring attention to the supreme court
it gave us abortion and same sex marriage
that is history
let's learn from it
get over it
some things you don't get over
killing babies
good morning
it will be ugly
it already is
it will divide us
we are already divided
elections have consequences
the last one was 2014 and we won the senate
it will energize the democrats in november
it will also bring attention to the supreme court
it gave us abortion and same sex marriage
that is history
let's learn from it
get over it
some things you don't get over
killing babies
good morning
good morning
obama got one thing right
trump will not be president?
there just aren't enough idiots out there
20 million voted for perot
you need 60 million
it wasn't enough for romney
he didn't get the mexican vote
is that why trump insulted them?
he has insulted just about everyone
the idiots love it
they have to blame someone
it is what victims do
good morning
obama got one thing right
trump will not be president?
there just aren't enough idiots out there
20 million voted for perot
you need 60 million
it wasn't enough for romney
he didn't get the mexican vote
is that why trump insulted them?
he has insulted just about everyone
the idiots love it
they have to blame someone
it is what victims do
good morning
good morning
so what is new?
apple encryption
is it that good?
the fbi can't hack it
so why doesn't apple help them?
they can't
do you believe that?
yes
they just want to break into one phone
you don't know what you are talking about
what don't I know?
you can't break into just one phone
why not?
you will be able to break into all the others
good morning
so what is new?
apple encryption
is it that good?
the fbi can't hack it
so why doesn't apple help them?
they can't
do you believe that?
yes
they just want to break into one phone
you don't know what you are talking about
what don't I know?
you can't break into just one phone
why not?
you will be able to break into all the others
The solution that occurred to me was if Apple officials did the hacking and simply handed over the results to the FBI....
did it occur to you
that
once the software was created
it could be available to others?
Like the formula to Coke?
lain:
You should be able to see what I did, too.
So, there are secrets, all sorts of important trade secrets, that corporations and individuals manage to keep guarded and they're worth billions of dollars of economic power. If Apple knows or can ascertain a way to comply with a court order relating to discovery of a known criminal enterprise utilizing its product then it should do so. There is no consumer/corporate privilege. But there is a corporate/citizen responsibility to aid law enforcement in discovery.
are you aware of any attempts by china to hack the coke formula?
Are you aware that you can build a thing that isn't hackable? We've had them for a very long time now.
looks like apple did
do you think they should be forced to compromise the design?
What does that even mean? This isn't a principle they hold, it's a product and one being used to create and sustain criminal enterprise. Should they find a way in and then give that relevant information to authorities? Absolutely, subject to judicial oversight and a court order.
You think that you can hold onto your private business records if you're involved in a criminal conspiracy? Do you think the bank that keeps your financial records will shield you from discovery on those grounds?
So, Apple should absolutely, if possible, find a way to mine that data and provide it, keeping the means to do so as their intellectual property, property subject to legal constraints that protect the data of innocent citizens and restrain Apple itself from using for personal gain.
apple has already told us
they don't have the means to do it
so
should they be forced to create it?
now
do you think they can create the means and limit it to just that phone?
can you answer both questions please
That's not the same as saying they can't do it. It's a very clever bit of lawyer generated denial, which is why the government isn't happy.
Should a bank be "forced" to mine its records and turn over statements relating to the financial dealings of terrorists or drug smugglers? Of course they should. Now given the nature of the request they should be compensated for the time and work it takes to comply.
I think they'll have to unless they mean to become a criminal enterprise.
I always answer a good question.
Maybe you're just bad at a) asking questions or b) understanding anything that isn't monosyllabic in answering them.
That's just your meme with me. It doesn't really make sense when you consider it though.
For people without that thing in their eye or on their backs, chrys asked me if I thought Apple should be forced to break into their own software.
His use of force was the actual clever turn, because it frames the question in a context that sounds brutish. My answer was to give a less brutish context and parallel within which any reasonable person would understand both the obligation and the lack or reasonableness in denying it. I then answered the question (because when you parallel and give the answer the answer must apply equally or there's no point in making the comparison).
My unambiguous answer: "OF COURSE THEY SHOULD" (emphasis added).
lain: That was question #1.Question #2 from Chrys was if I thought they could create the means and limit it to the one phone.
My answer? "I think they'll have to unless they mean to become a criminal enterprise."
Nothing hidden or hard to fathom in either. Nothing elusive or evasive either. And as I noted earlier, people keep secrets all the time, for generations even and even when the secret is one carrying great wealth and power.
My unambiguous answer: "OF COURSE THEY SHOULD" (emphasis added).
Question #2 from Chrys was if I thought they could create the means and limit it to the one phone.
My answer? "I think they'll have to unless they mean to become a criminal enterprise."
finally an answer
thank you
we now have you stating
that
the government should force them to do what may be impossible to do
and
any good programmer would be able to confirm this
so far they haven't asked one
they prefer the argument
and
getting everyone all upset
I don't wish to argue this with you
it is just too much work
getting a meaningful answer from you
as I stated in another thread
stop listening to the fbi
and
start listening to apple
and
believe them
their position is posted online
so
everyone can find it
but
so far the media hasn't
I literally just repeated myself.
lain: But you're welcome anyway.No, you don't. Do you even know what the government is actually asking Apple to do? Hint: it isn't the impossible (arguably) task of breaking their encryption.
Here's what it actually is: they want Apple to disable the data wipe after 10 tries feature. Then the government hackers can simply run all the combinations needed to unlock it themselves. It's still a problematic request, since Apple would have to write software to do it, but it's not the impossible hack that people keep speaking to or misreporting.
It can't be any harder than getting a fair assessment out of you...easier even, since I still haven't gotten that.
Or, read the filings, not the pr releases and see what's what and what isn't and don't blindly follow a corporate shill or feather your nest with the rufflings of government employees.