I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.
Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.
I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.
My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.
A much more likely scenario would be the terrorist in custody has the location and detonation codes for a nuke in a major U.S. city. How far would those who oppose “enhanced interrogation” techniques go in getting that information out of the terrorist? Would they be willing to sacrifice millions of lives to preserve their ideology and sense of righteousness?
You're talking to people ready to blow themselves up : torture is useless. It's useless even when the person is not willing to go that far. They'll say anything to make it stop (and thus you get no actionable intel) By the time, you know they lied, it would probably be to late anyway. Or they'll send you on wild goose chases until its too late.
As for "knowing" they have that nuke info (nice p.o.s strawman btw... Even neo con hawks don't go that far), how the hell would you know that? If you know that, you probably had that person under surveillance anyway and you don't need to torture anyone. If not, you're not going to catch him before it goes off if you're relying torture as your savior.
Torture as a means of preventing a crime is utterly useless, and also detrimental to the US's moral fabric.
I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.
Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.
I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.
My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.
A much more likely scenario would be the terrorist in custody has the location and detonation codes for a nuke in a major U.S. city. How far would those who oppose “enhanced interrogation” techniques go in getting that information out of the terrorist? Would they be willing to sacrifice millions of lives to preserve their ideology and sense of righteousness?
that scenario isn't "likely" at all. it's absurdism. codes? for a nuclear missle/bomb, on a phone? and you'd need to know the codes to stop the nuke from detonating?
that is pure TV nonsense, and will never come to pass. the only nukes that hit will come from a sovereign state capable of firing said missles into our airspace. no codes will help you. a dirty bomb is low tech, won't have codes, and won't be capable of killing millions.
Remember when America used to stand for certain ideals? Guess we were just hypocrites all along. How does one keep a population from being dumbed down to the point that it accepts cruelty as a legitimate form of law enforcement? Why would anyone ever consider it in their interest to promote this kind of precedent? What are we fighting to defend if we end up living under a regime that terrorizes and tortures its own people? I remember universal opposition to these methods under any conditions as recently as the 90s. It was a central moral justification for opposition to other political systems. Now we can understand totalitarianism in socialist countries not as a natural and inevitable outcome of a planned economy, but as a reaction to an existential threat from external hostile forces. Because we do it too. Capitalism has in no way protected us from the loss of civil liberties. That was just a lie they used as propaganda and only until they rid themselves of the Soviet Union. Now that they think communism isn't so much of a threat, the mask comes off. But that's kind of stupid, don't you think? They're just setting in motion the same determinants that led to communist revolutions in the 20th century. And this time we have information technology that can exceed the usefulness of money in determining the allocation of goods and services. Their time is over, and they know it, which is why they are spying on their own populations and framing muslims to curtail civil liberties.
Please tell me when the American government stood for those ideals that you so lovingly think we used to have. The American government at various levels supported lynching, mass detainment of individuals and entire societies it felt were at risk to "our way of life," waterboarding of foreigners who they took all legal rights away from by calling them terrorists, illegal wire tapping, false incrimination and destruction of people they labeled communists (freedom of speech is allowed by the first amendment and McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover violated this and many other laws), and a whole host of other non-American ideals. Torture has been used since the dawn of time to force people to talk and no matter what some people say, it's still in use in the US and around the world. It's, unfortunately, in our DNA and humans might be the only species that engage in torture or its own kind as well as of other species. It doesn't say much for us does it.
As for @apple ]['s comment, it brought a smile to my face because I saw it as being a little sarcastic but I also saw it as something we know US government organizations have been involved with, maybe not to the point of actually cutting off fingers but getting close to that. There have been Americans who have done that and not just in the movies.
Do I agree with what @apple ][ suggests? Absolutely not. But I would like to see more honesty coming out of the US government especially since I'm a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen. I want the FBI to tell the truth about what they're doing. I want to know who they used to hack into the iPhone 5c. I want to know what they found. What I don't want to know is all the half-truths and blatant lies and misdirections being spewed by Comey and others. They demand to know the truth, so do we.
Up to your last paragraph, with you 100%. Your thesis isn't a total solution but a reach for reason, to balance the dumbed down minds whipped up by people like DT, whose demographic skews heavily to a less educated citizenry, many looking for a "father figure" to beat up the "people WE consider the bad guys".
Your last paragraph is where I disagree: "I want to know who they used to hack into the iPhone 5c. I want to know what they found."
As torture has existed since the dawn of time, so has secrecy, spying and covert plans and ops, a proven weapon in fighting forces, a culture, often barbaric, that's not open to negotiation or reasonable dialogue. I don't agree with the public grandstanding the FBI did, actually worsening their public image when they likely thought it would sway public opinion in their favor, but,,,,their job is not to reveal things they discover, techniques they use, be transparent in their ops. Nor is it the obligation of the FBI, CIA, MI15, SO15, FSB, Mossad or any other intelligence gathering entity. Theirs is a dirty business, but it's a dirty game and always has been between cultures.
Out of curiosity I would like to know if they found anything on the SB phone, but it's not my business. Sure I may want to (and do) defend Apple's firm stance on privacy, but that's my want, not compelling enough to force intel and espionage forces to change their method of operating.
The Department of Justice and FBI are such liars. They are also lazy - as described by Apple in its arguments.
It's legal for the DoJ and the FBI to lie to you. The DoJ is the most inappropriately named Federal agency. If these guys ever showed up to ask me questions I'd plead the 5th. Hell only knows how an accidental misstatement could land me in jail accused of lying so they can legally extort "cooperation"
Next case - the two boys lost at sea, whose iPhone magically appeared in their capsized boat found off Bermuda 9 months later. How could anyone deny the parents peace of mind?
My theory: Someone close to this guy in New York saw the report of the FBI paying over $1.3Million to unlock the San Bernardino iPhone. They then wondered what the FBI would pay to unlock this iPhone.
"When every IoT device is connected to the Internet, all can be hacked".
It's just a matter of time and priorities. Now that the George Jetson
"smart home" of the future is in full swing, trendy, the bomb, whatever.....
all the hackers have to do is find a rich acquaintance
and hack his iPhone by physically bumping into him. This was recently shown on the "60 minutes"
news program last Sunday. Once hacked, just unlock the "smart" deadbolt on his front
door and take all his stuff.
Doubt all that comes from "MIT", as for your Iphone bump "hack", come on, give me a break.
Most people talking about "hacks" don't know what the hell they're talking about, simple as that.
The main reason IOT will be vulnerable is because most people are morons about security, most attacks are done though social engineering, not tech. People, not tech are the weakest link.
BTW, I've got computer engineering degrees from Polytechnique, Mcgill (both in Montreal) and Stanford, I think I know a bit about those things; a bit...
It is total bull that Feng forgot his code while someone else remembered it. Who was that someone else? Nobody except for me knows my passwords. It is not the thing I share. Even if I let someone else use my phone, I unlock it first. I don't buy what the Govt is telling us.
The sad thing is every lock manufacturer in America is required to submit a master key to the US government. It's utter bullshit, and fastforward a few years I can see them forcing this policy on Apple and all other companies that provide any encryption.
I've always believed that Apple devices are magical: FBI can't get into S Bernardo o phone? Boom! Magically they find a solution in the last second. Can't get into next phone? Boom! An "unknown individual" again comes to resume last second. Truly magical.
A Unicorn told them after they sliced its horn off centimeter by centimeter.
Comments
(Note to self: do not read thread backwards).
It's useless even when the person is not willing to go that far. They'll say anything to make it stop (and thus you get no actionable intel)
By the time, you know they lied, it would probably be to late anyway. Or they'll send you on wild goose chases until its too late.
As for "knowing" they have that nuke info (nice p.o.s strawman btw... Even neo con hawks don't go that far), how the hell would you know that?
If you know that, you probably had that person under surveillance anyway and you don't need to torture anyone.
If not, you're not going to catch him before it goes off if you're relying torture as your savior.
Torture as a means of preventing a crime is utterly useless, and also detrimental to the US's moral fabric.
that is pure TV nonsense, and will never come to pass. the only nukes that hit will come from a sovereign state capable of firing said missles into our airspace. no codes will help you. a dirty bomb is low tech, won't have codes, and won't be capable of killing millions.
next.
Your last paragraph is where I disagree: "I want to know who they used to hack into the iPhone 5c. I want to know what they found."
As torture has existed since the dawn of time, so has secrecy, spying and covert plans and ops, a proven weapon in fighting forces, a culture, often barbaric, that's not open to negotiation or reasonable dialogue. I don't agree with the public grandstanding the FBI did, actually worsening their public image when they likely thought it would sway public opinion in their favor, but,,,,their job is not to reveal things they discover, techniques they use, be transparent in their ops. Nor is it the obligation of the FBI, CIA, MI15, SO15, FSB, Mossad or any other intelligence gathering entity. Theirs is a dirty business, but it's a dirty game and always has been between cultures.
Out of curiosity I would like to know if they found anything on the SB phone, but it's not my business. Sure I may want to (and do) defend Apple's firm stance on privacy, but that's my want, not compelling enough to force intel and espionage forces to change their method of operating.
I am still on Apple's side when it comes to unlocking any phones for the govt, and they should flatly refuse any such requests.
Simple Facts from MIT:
"When every IoT device is connected to the Internet, all can be hacked".
It's just a matter of time and priorities. Now that the George Jetson
"smart home" of the future is in full swing, trendy, the bomb, whatever.....
all the hackers have to do is find a rich acquaintance
and hack his iPhone by physically bumping into him. This was recently shown on the "60 minutes"
news program last Sunday. Once hacked, just unlock the "smart" deadbolt on his front
door and take all his stuff.
And now they know.
Most people talking about "hacks" don't know what the hell they're talking about, simple as that.
The main reason IOT will be vulnerable is because most people are morons about security, most attacks are done though social engineering, not tech.
People, not tech are the weakest link.
BTW, I've got computer engineering degrees from Polytechnique, Mcgill (both in Montreal) and Stanford, I think I know a bit about those things; a bit...
The sad thing is every lock manufacturer in America is required to submit a master key to the US government. It's utter bullshit, and fastforward a few years I can see them forcing this policy on Apple and all other companies that provide any encryption.