Apple reportedly latest company to join US government's PRISM data mining program [ux2]

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 129
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericblr View Post


    The problem isn't the politicians in office, it's the people who voted them in.



     


    The problem is the two party system and the winner-take-all approach to representation, gerrymandering election district boundaries, etc.


     


    When the option is to cast a vote between bad and worse, how do you expect to get even halfway decent politicians in power?


     


    The "choice" we have is like going to a restaurant and getting the "choice" of french fries and onion rings, when what we're looking for are healthy vegetables and a fresh salad.

  • Reply 62 of 129
    froodfrood Posts: 771member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by japm View Post


     


    What agenda? Are you watching the news?


     


    PRISM has been confirmed by many many sources inside congress and government in general.


    Those companies DO provide back door access for the NSA and they DO have agreements for that, which makes their statements LIES.



     


    Pay attention to the wording-   Apple has never heard of PRISM (the government did not name it PRISM in their NSA letter to Apple telling them to comply), Apple does not give the government direct access to their servers (apple has a subsidiary somewhere with a computer that does have access to their servers-  the NSA has direct access to *that* computer)


     


    Apple is telling the truth.


     


    And relax, this isn't an 'Apple' issue.  But tinfoil hats are fun and Apple does have the best juiciest tracking of their users for the NSA sooooo....  Is Apple's IDFA (ID For Advertisers-the user ID on each phone, claimed to be for advertisers, but which Apple does not allow users to turn off) *really* a user ID for advertisers to use, or is it really the IDFNSA.....

  • Reply 63 of 129
    japmjapm Posts: 36member


    This is a Law/Government issue, but I'm just so extremely disappointed that Apple so blatantly lied about this, exactly like Verizon did back in 2006.


    They could have just said, no comment - but they made an explicit untrue statement to avoid bad PR.


     


    This has destroyed every bid of trust that I ever had in Apple.


     


    Doing it voluntarily is one thing, but then lying about it is another.

  • Reply 64 of 129
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by japm View Post


    This is a Law/Government issue, but I'm just so extremely disappointed that Apple so blatantly lied about this, exactly like Verizon did back in 2006.


    They could have just said, no comment - but they made an explicit untrue statement to avoid bad PR.


     


    This has destroyed every bid of trust that I ever had in Apple.


     


    Doing it voluntarily is one thing, but then lying about it is another.



     


    Nobody is doing anything voluntarily, because it costs them mega bucks to comply with these information requests.


    Lying is all the can do, because by law they are required to deny any knowledge and are not allowed to warn the victims of a spy attack that they are targeted.


    Simple silence is always interpreted as "tacit agreement", or as the old Romans said: "Qui tacit consentire videtur", thus a dementi is the only thing they can plausibly do within the legal framework.


     


    The idiocy is that the American public is fine with this and has been assuaged with plenty of flag waving, invoking of patriotism (even in the blatantly misnamed "Patriot Act"), military posturing, we-re-under-attack-rhetoric, and lots of propaganda on rightwing TV, such that anyone criticizing the Bush-Cheney policies (happily continued by Obama) is considered a potential terrorist, aka "either you're with us, or you're with them".


     


    9/11 was the biggest catastrophe, but not because of the people who perished (many more die each ear of drunk driving and nobody gives a damn), but because it delivered a pretext under which this country has been transformed into something that resembles the government apparatus to spy on the population like that employed by eastern block countries before the collapse of the iron curtain.


     


    I guess, just like the Germans after WWII helped the US build the rockets for the moon landing, so the Russians after the cold war helped the US build a good surveillance apparatus. 


     


    Anyway, no need to be alarmed: the same companies that claim no knowledge are heavily involved with helping the Chinese to build their "Great Firewall" and rat out dissidents to the regime when it translates into $$$.

  • Reply 65 of 129
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,354member
    frood wrote: »
    Pay attention to the wording-   Apple has never heard of PRISM (the government did not name it PRISM in their NSA letter to Apple telling them to comply), Apple does not give the government direct access to their servers (apple has a subsidiary somewhere with a computer that does have access to their servers-  the NSA has direct access to *that* computer)

    Is Apple's IDFA (ID For Advertisers-the user ID on each phone, claimed to be for advertisers, but which Apple does not allow users to turn off) *really* a user ID for advertisers to use, or is it really the IDFNSA.....

    Yeah it is kinda "conspiracy theory" territory, but the timing of Apple's change to a new user tracking system, IDFA, helps feed the 'hatter's. Interesting. . .

    Anyway,no one should be shocked that companies involved in any way with internet communications would be feeding into the government's monitoring programs by law or executive order. I'm not at all surprised.

    EDIT: In response to the wide outrage over this and similar programs the White House declassified some details:
    Among the previously classified information about the phone records collection that Clapper revealed:

    "—The program is conducted under authority granted by Congress and is authorized by the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Court which determines the legality of the program.

    —The government is prohibited from "indiscriminately sifting" through the data acquired. It can only be reviewed "when there is a reasonable suspicion, based on specific facts, that the particular basis for the query is associated with a foreign terrorist organization." He also said only counterterrorism personnel trained in the program may access the records.

    —The information acquired is overseen by the Justice Department and the FISA court. Only a very small fraction of the records are ever reviewed, he said.

    —The program is reviewed every 90 days.

    The Obama administration's defense of the two programs came as members of Congress were vowing to change a program they voted to authorize and exasperated civil liberties advocates were crying foul, questioning how President Barack Obama, a former constitutional scholar who sought privacy protections as a U.S. senator, could embrace policies aligned with President George W. Bush, whose approach to national security he had vowed to leave behind."
  • Reply 66 of 129
    webweaselwebweasel Posts: 138member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post


     


    Something that has absolutely nothing to do with what is reported by the Post or the Guardian, but still is mentioned on the slides they have published. Sounds like they had some delusional deep throat at work here.



     


    A secret government spying project - Of course it'll have a public-facing website!  Good job you're not working for the Post...  What makes you think this has anything to do with aviation other than a three letter acronym that could stand for anything?

  • Reply 67 of 129
    jj.yuanjj.yuan Posts: 213member


    Costing only $20M per year? This is cheap!


     


    My company's licensing of some software packages costs most than $40M per year. The overall operational cost will double that.

     

  • Reply 68 of 129
    cjcampbellcjcampbell Posts: 115member
    These toads insist that all this government snooping is critical to the fight against terrorism. Except that they seem to spend more time and resources harassing their political opposition rather than fighting terrorists. Check those phone records to see who is being called by Republican fundraisers? You got it, Boss! Find out who the whistle blowers are? Right away! Check out who is posting anti-tax comments on the Internet? Sic the IRS, INS, FBI, NSA, BATF, and everybody else on them right now! Some Moslem is looking for guns to shoot up an Army post? Meh.
  • Reply 69 of 129
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    realistic wrote: »
    Your gramma has gotten much worserer too.

    That was a deliberate word choice. Ever hear of "artistic license"?
  • Reply 70 of 129
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by japm View Post

    It's official, Apple LIED - they ARE participating  in PRISM.


     


    It's official: you have absolutely no proof whatsoever.


     



    Originally Posted by ericblr View Post

    The problem isn't the politicians in office, it's the people who voted them in.


     


    No, that's completely wrong.





    Originally Posted by japm View Post

    This is a Law/Government issue, but I'm just so extremely disappointed that Apple so blatantly lied about this, exactly like Verizon did back in 2006.


    They could have just said, no comment - but they made an explicit untrue statement to avoid bad PR.


     


    This has destroyed every bid of trust that I ever had in Apple.


     


    Doing it voluntarily is one thing, but then lying about it is another.



     


    Stop saying this without proof. Or, better yet, since you don't trust Apple, leave and never return.

  • Reply 71 of 129
    eliangonzaleliangonzal Posts: 490member
    "To the endless parade of critics who have been wondering why Americans have been stockpiling weapons, ammo, food, water and fuel for years... this story is a tiny piece of the answer."

    Yeah, and you all *still* have nothing to show for it. Give me a break.
  • Reply 72 of 129
    magic_almagic_al Posts: 325member
    A national security letter or similar, one-sided gag order is constitutionally dubious. It's an involuntary NDA, without the A (you don't agree to anything). The existence of such authority is incompatible with "Congress shall make no law... abridging freedom of speech".

    A random person or small company may be intimidated from challenging the government but Apple is big enough to litigate this.
  • Reply 73 of 129
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    magic_al wrote: »
    A national security letter or similar, one-sided gag order is constitutionally dubious. It's an involuntary NDA, without the A (you don't agree to anything). The existence of such authority is incompatible with "Congress shall make no law... abridging freedom of speech".

    A random person or small company may be intimidated from challenging the government but Apple is big enough to litigate this.

    Threats of automatic imprisonment without trial have a way of changing the decision making process.
  • Reply 74 of 129
    japmjapm Posts: 36member


    Hey Tallest Skil,


     


    I guess you've missed the OFFICIAL confirmation.


     


    YES Apple did LIE.


     


     


    Quote "The New York Times":


    WASHINGTON — The federal government has been secretly collecting information on foreigners overseas for nearly six years from the nation’s largest Internet companies like Google, Facebook and, most recently, Apple, in search of national security threats, the director of national intelligence confirmed Thursday night.



     


    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/us/nsa-verizon-calls.html?hp&_r=1&;

  • Reply 75 of 129
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by japm View Post

    Hey Tallest SkilI guess you've missed the OFFICIAL confirmation.


     


    Guess you missed it, too. That's why you didn't bother posting it.

  • Reply 76 of 129
    japmjapm Posts: 36member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frood View Post


    Pay attention to the wording-   Apple has never heard of PRISM [...], Apple does not give the government direct access to their servers (apple has a subsidiary somewhere with a computer that does have access to their servers-  the NSA has direct access to *that* computer)



     


    You where absolutely right Frood!


     


    That's exactly how they did it, so they could (with clever wording) deny everything. 


    That's just so sleazy.


     


    Quote:


     In another classified report obtained by The Post, the arrangement is described as allowing "collection managers [to send] content tasking instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled locations," rather than directly to company servers.


  • Reply 77 of 129
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    japm wrote: »
    You where absolutely right Frood!

    That's exactly how they did it, so they could (with clever wording) deny everything. 
    That's just so sleazy.

    Stil on this irrational kick of yours?

    You says he's absolutely right but can't prove it. You then go to say that it's exactly how they do it. No variation at all with the scenario that could lead to the same results; only that exact scenario. You then conclude that its' "just so sleazy" and yet you have yet to show that any of these companies have done any of the things you've stated they've done. What's even more ridiculous about this comment is that you make yourself a hypocrite as you previous stated they are lying which mean what they are saying is inaccurate, but now you claiming what they doing exactly is different from what they stated. You can't have it both ways.


    Here's how your response might sound if you actually wanted to sound like a rationale and reasonable person…
    NOT_japm wrote:
    That certainly sounds plausible Frood!

    There is plenty of evidence of companies using clever wording to be factual and yet deceptive.

    If this is indeed the case it's sleazy.
  • Reply 78 of 129
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,263member
    The US has been spying on it's citizens since day one but the big push started with the grand wizard J Edgar Hoover. Since then everything has been free game regardless of constitutionality. There's two sets of laws: one for our spies and one for the rest of us.
  • Reply 79 of 129
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    rcfa wrote: »
    The problem is the two party system and the winner-take-all approach to representation, gerrymandering election district boundaries, etc.

    When the option is to cast a vote between bad and worse, how do you expect to get even halfway decent politicians in power?

    The "choice" we have is like going to a restaurant and getting the "choice" of french fries and onion rings, when what we're looking for are healthy vegetables and a fresh salad.

    We don't have a two-party system, we have the illusion of no other choices combined with two parties which have crafted laws that disfavor the smaller, less well funded parties. This is not hyperbole.
  • Reply 80 of 129
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    japm wrote: »
    [SIZE=16px]Hey Tallest Skil,[/SIZE]

    [SIZE=16px]I guess you've missed the OFFICIAL confirmation.[/SIZE]

    [SIZE=16px]YES Apple did LIE.[/SIZE]



    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/us/nsa-verizon-calls.html?hp&_r=1&

    I'll keep repeating my response... Even acknowledgement of orders from the government to cooperate on these matters is ILLEGAL and an instant IMPRISONABLE OFFENSE. That is the law as written. Don't believe it? Look it up for yourself. Read the entire Patriot Act.

    Why are you confirming suspicions that you are clueless?
Sign In or Register to comment.