[Nervous fidgeting, crickets chirping]
- Google, Facebook, Yahoo (who were all no-shows at the cybersecurity summit)
The CEO's declined the invitation but those companies all sent their top-level security reps: Scott Charney, Microsoft’s corporate vice president for trustworthy computing; Eric Grosse, Google’s vice president for security engineering; Alex Stamos, Yahoo’s chief information security officer; and Joe Sullivan, Facebook’s chief information security officer.
Obama's included plan to protect companies sharing information with the Feds from consumer privacy lawsuits is a fig leaf I'm surprised didn't sway more of them yet. I suspect more may buy-in over the next week or so. Note too that there's been a lot of positive Apple PR from the Feds quite recently, Quid pro quo perhaps, bring Apple on board and the rest are more likely to follow?
I don't tbelieve a corporate CEO should have the right to decide how much privacy I need. Give me the RIGHT TO CHOOSE. I'm not easily brainwashed or a shill for everything Apple and everything Tim Cook.
You have the option to choose who supplies the tech you use. If you disagree with Apple's privacy policies, or any of their business positions then you can choose another supplier. Simple isn't it.
I don't tbelieve a corporate CEO should have the right to decide how much privacy I need. Give me the RIGHT TO CHOOSE. I'm not easily brainwashed or a shill for everything Apple and everything Tim Cook.
There, there. We all know Tim Cook is a very bad man who deserves nothing but spite and scorn. Feel better?
Ther is no need to collaborate with government for security practices. Government generally wants to circumvent security and control people, NOT keep them free and defend liberty.
I cannot see how this move can possibly be positive. In many ways Apple has been good at pushing strong crypto, etc., this I see as a potential red flag.
I don't tbelieve a corporate CEO should have the right to decide how much privacy I need. Give me the RIGHT TO CHOOSE. I'm not easily brainwashed or a shill for everything Apple and everything Tim Cook.
He doesn't, he exercises his RIGHT TO CHOOSE how his products work. You exercise your RIGHT TO CHOOSE them or not.
You do realise your obsession with the RIGHT TO CHOOSE from is itself unnatural and the result of brainwashing right?
If Apple does not want to update iOS to allow for information sharing with governments, my question to Cook would be: would he allow a third-party app in the App Store that will accomplish the same feat? Is he truly an advocate for human rights and personal safety? Let's get to the real bottom of his motives, shall we.
He has already, just install Google Chrome or any other Google spyware. They sell data to the highest bidder & judging by their last 10K filing the biggest contributor to their bottom line was a tax break from the U.S. Government.
So your mis-guided sense of patriotism can be invoked/revoked as YOU CHOOSE (even if those options are pre-determined)
Try actually reading it. Again. By looking at the words, comprehending their meaning, and putting that meaning into context.
Oh right, thank you, how very silly of me, fancy that, I didn't actually read your post, I didn't comprehend the meaning and on top of all that I didn't put the meaning into context.. Done that now. You still are and I'm still right.
Try actually reading it. Again. By looking at the words, comprehending their meaning, and putting that meaning into context.
Oh right, thank you, how very silly of me, fancy that, I didn't actually read your post, I didn't comprehend the meaning and on top of all that I didn't put the meaning into context.. Done that now. You still are and I'm still right.
I am allowed to share a private conversation with anyone, including private investigators and the government if I so choose. There is nothing you can do to prevent me from protecting my safety and interests.
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Protecting your safety… by purposely sharing private information with the government. That’s funny.
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
Originally Posted by Sociable Weaver
If you really think you are not sharing data already with the government that's even funnier.
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
In short, read posts before replying to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Okay, let’s run through this word by word.
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
In short, read posts before replying to them.
Oh dear. If it's funny to deliberately share date, it's even funnier to say that's funny when everything you post, mail, blog and tweet is picked up anyway. Next you'll be telling us that you can't be found on google, which of course you can, extensively. By the way is the big font you are so fond of meant to convey something special?
Comments
Obama's included plan to protect companies sharing information with the Feds from consumer privacy lawsuits is a fig leaf I'm surprised didn't sway more of them yet. I suspect more may buy-in over the next week or so. Note too that there's been a lot of positive Apple PR from the Feds quite recently, Quid pro quo perhaps, bring Apple on board and the rest are more likely to follow?
You have the option to choose who supplies the tech you use. If you disagree with Apple's privacy policies, or any of their business positions then you can choose another supplier. Simple isn't it.
Protecting your safety… by purposely sharing private information with the government.
That’s funny.
If you really think you are not sharing data already with the government that's even funnier.
Try reading my post.
There, there. We all know Tim Cook is a very bad man who deserves nothing but spite and scorn. Feel better?
I cannot see how this move can possibly be positive. In many ways Apple has been good at pushing strong crypto, etc., this I see as a potential red flag.
WOW! Tinfoil hats for EVERYBODY! Both sides of the argument.
I can't even tell which side of the argument some of these posters are taking.
You do realise your obsession with the RIGHT TO CHOOSE from is itself unnatural and the result of brainwashing right?
So your mis-guided sense of patriotism can be invoked/revoked as YOU CHOOSE (even if those options are pre-determined)
What does who you love have to do with cyber security? I'm failing to understand what gay rights has to do with cyber security,
Pretty sure that is exactly the point Cook was making.
(or was that the point that you are making?) Man, this comment thread is confusing.
Try reading my post.
I did. You are. I'm right.
Try actually reading it. Again. By looking at the words, comprehending their meaning, and putting that meaning into context.
Try actually reading it. Again. By looking at the words, comprehending their meaning, and putting that meaning into context.
Oh right, thank you, how very silly of me, fancy that, I didn't actually read your post, I didn't comprehend the meaning and on top of all that I didn't put the meaning into context.. Done that now. You still are and I'm still right.
Try actually reading it. Again. By looking at the words, comprehending their meaning, and putting that meaning into context.
Oh right, thank you, how very silly of me, fancy that, I didn't actually read your post, I didn't comprehend the meaning and on top of all that I didn't put the meaning into context.. Done that now. You still are and I'm still right.
Now, now, children.
Now, now, children.
I know. I'll try behaving.
Okay, let’s run through this word by word.
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
In short, read posts before replying to them.
Okay, let’s run through this word by word.
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
In short, read posts before replying to them.
Okay, let’s run through this word by word.
Yves is speaking of compartmentalizing his data and personal information and shunting it off to the government at regular intervals to prove he is a “good citizen”. He believes that this will keep him safe (from the government), because the only thing governments care about is catching criminals, you know; they would never want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, no no.
Thus, I replied to this effect, mocking the decision (again, the decision to willingly, consciously, and purposefully share information with the government) that is in the polar opposite of his safety, privacy (though he did not mention it), and interests.
And what do you do?
You come along, not reading the post at all, and say this.
Nowhere did I say anything about not already having your information shared with the government. If you still think you have proof of your claim, post it now. *ding* [your teacher will stop the projector so you can answer the question] *ding*
In short, read posts before replying to them.
Oh dear. If it's funny to deliberately share date, it's even funnier to say that's funny when everything you post, mail, blog and tweet is picked up anyway. Next you'll be telling us that you can't be found on google, which of course you can, extensively. By the way is the big font you are so fond of meant to convey something special?