Originally Posted by solipsism
Did you play the “phone game” as a kid. The game where one person whispers a sentence into another person’s ear, who passes it on until the last person who speaks it aloud and everybody has a big laugh at how distorted it had become? Well that is what I’m thinking right now.
I knew about this filing with the copyright office, but the explanation you gave had me confused. I said to myself, “How could jailbroken iPhones be used for terrorism in ways that other phones couldn’t and why was Apple even argue such a case?” The original filing, in the link below, never once mentions terror, terrorism, pterodactyl, 9/11, Al-Qaeda or Rudy Giuliani.
It does state…
I'm not the one you originally in that particular back and forth, I just happened to chime in because I disagreed with the assertion that we don't own our iPhone OS, just have a license to use it. I don't disagree with that, but as I stated, I disagree with Apple's ability to lockdown the BootRom and prevent us from loading alternate software on the device we own, and by extension, modifying the software that is on it. We do own the hardware.
I'll share the chuckle with you over the phone game analogy (as well as the Rudy joke), and that's the risk we all run we get our news from blogs that have allegedly read what they're blogging about, but I really think you're splitting hairs here.
If you read the entire paragraph that you started a quote of, despite the actual word terrorist not appearing in it, it's easy to make the very small step from the image described of an
international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software
into the international hacker being a terrorist. It just depends on how loose your definition of terrorist is.
At any rate, it's a bit of a stretch and nothing more than scare tactics to imply that jailbreaking turns the iPhone into such a hacker threat any more so than any other cellphone; the phone's been jailbreakable for two years or more now, and we don't see towers being taken over and crashed because of it. It's nothing more than sensationalism on Apple's behalf.
ISP sor cable companies could use the same argument against allowing user-modifiable computers on their networks as well. Kind of silly.