john galt

... and every single one of the Republican candidates for President of this once great nation advocated compelling Apple to yield to the overwhelming power of government to compel them to create a product that does not exist and for which there is no market need. That confirmed beyond any doubt there is no difference among those elected to allegedly serve the public: they're all sick twisted control freaks, no matter what color they might be. None of them has a clue what's at stake in this case. Worse yet is that they're not interested in learning. Nothing good will come of this, not for Apple, not for the public, not for the families of the particular case that's being exploited to fulfill the FBI's wishes, and certainly not future victims of crimes yet to be committed. The latter will certainly become out of control, once it becomes possible for any lowlife to crack into everyone else's personal information. That is the logical result of creating that ability. To see it one must think logically; to connect the dots. It shouldn't take a genius but none of the idiots on that podium appear to be capable of that.

justbobf said:

I'd like to know the difference between an industrial age tax code and a digital age tax code. To me, it just sounds like Tim and Company don't like paying taxes. But, maybe others can explain his thoughts. 

Here's a short quiz for you Bob.

A publicly traded company's primary fiduciary responsibility is to:

1: its shareholders
2: its employees
3: taxpayers
4: social justice

You can probably figure out the answer, but if you need help, it is easily found in federal law.

Come on Apple. We can trust our government. They never lie to us about anything.

Don't worry! If you like your encryption, you can keep your encryption!

I don't think he quite understands Apple's reasons for appealing the order. The DOJ is compelling Apple to create software that doesn't exist. Slavery was abolished in the US some time ago. Apple was pushed into an untenable situation to which they responded in the only way possible.

The DOJ graciously offered to pay for that software development. No one outside Apple knows what it cost them to develop iOS. Billions, certainly, Tens of billions? Who knows. Who cares? Write a blank check and stick it to the taxpayer, for a product that even the DOJ insists will be used once and only once, to obtain intelligence they don't even know exists.

This is political theater. The FBI wants everyone's personal information and by God they're going to get it. The government can be trusted with it. Right?

That the incident in question be declared an Act of Terrorism, with casualties

That's also specious. What can be considered an "Act of Terrorism" is open to interpretation and abuse. Who decides whether someone's actions are considered an Act of Terrorism or mere Workplace Violence? Was it the weapons used? Were there Koran verses invoked, or was it a Cross that was held high? Was it the dress, language, or appearance of the criminals? The manner of execution, whether it's being pushed off a building, burning alive in a cage, or beheading? Will it be the MPAA who decides on how much blood defines an R rating or mere PG?

No matter what, the casualties are still dead. Re-think that, Mark Cuban.

Gatekeeper "goes too far"? Hardly.

An effective security strategy is a multilayered one, and Gatekeeper is just one part of an overall mindset that any computer user must adopt in order to avoid inadvertently installing malware, or just simply junk software. Gatekeeper is also easily bypassed by control-clicking the app (no, command-click is incorrect). A two-finger tap works also. That will cause the dialog box in the illustration to appear. It's incumbent upon the user to read, comprehend, and act upon what it says.

If the user doesn't do that, well, they get what's coming to them. You can't fix stupid.

"... only do this if you're sure the app is from a reputable developer and has not been tampered with."

You can't really rely upon that either. Even reputable developers have had their distribution sites hacked.

"Positioning their refusal to cooperate as having anything to do with privacy interests is a corporate PR stunt and ignores the 4th Amendment protections afforded by our Constitution." A comment that illustrates that genius has limits but ignorance knows no bounds.