Apple could be held liable for supporting terrorism with strong iOS encryption, experts theorize

1457910

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 183
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,328member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Brakken View Post



    At some point I'm hoping the stupid reaches critical mass and implodes.






    Critical masses explode. But I second the basic concept.


    Depends what kind of critical mass...

    ...when the mass becomes big enough it'll implode into a black hole. That's how stupid needs to go, not by spewing radioactive fallout all over the place, which is what would happen in the explosion case image



    At the risk of going completely off topic, the process of gravitational implosion produces a huge amount of emitted radiation, dwarfing any criticality-driven explosion. 

  • Reply 122 of 183

    Welcome to Obama's America.

  • Reply 123 of 183
    rcfarcfa Posts: 786member
    Let's face it:
    This isn't about what would happen in court, this is an attempt at bullying Apple to weaken their products by means of using public opinion as a pressure, well knowing that a) the public doesn't understand crypto and privacy and b) that Apple as a consumer driven company is very sensitive to how it's perceived.
    Thus the same old scare: abducted child, terrorists, and now also angry shareholders who don't want Apple to be a target of lawsuits.
    It's an attempt at blackmailing Apple.

    Further, the lawyers in question know that anything that mentions Apple is automatically newsworthy, so by attaching the name Apple to some dubious legal thought experiment they got tons of publicity for free.
  • Reply 124 of 183
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,077member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pakitt View Post

     

    Where do you think terrorists come from? kids with regular loving family with a job, food every day on the table, a roof on their head, and a future ahead of them, or where else?

     

     


     

    They come from being indoctrinated into radical Islam, in most cases.   

     

    Quote:

    Do you think that people that have a regular life, a job, food, convenience and a future to look to, end up bombing places and use their iPhones to kill people?


     

    Yes.  Yes they do.  Economic circumstances have little to nothing to do with terrorism.  

     

    Quote:

    If you don't have a passport, as it seems, get one and travel the world, the real one, and see how delusional I am. Go and see real poverty. And the kids there that will become the adults of the near future. Then you will see where terrorists come from. 


     

    You actually believe lack of opportunity is the root cause of terror. I have a passport.

     

    Quote:

    I don't know what "idiots working at State" means. You seem to assume that everybody reading and commenting here are from the only country on the planet, namely the USA. Think twice.


     

    State.  The U.S. State Department.  Surely, even a non-U.S. citizen understands this is a common way to refer to that department.  I wrote that because one of the idiot spokespersons--Marie Harf--actually parroted the same bullshit you're spouting.  

     

    By the way, I don't assume everyone here is from the USA, nor do I assume it is the only country on the planet.  I am an American, and the majority of posters here are Americans, posting in a forum originally started to discuss an American company's products.  I do know that your condescending european bullshit is nothing new.  

  • Reply 125 of 183
    qvak wrote: »
    slurpy wrote: »
    - I have read the Quran front to cover dozens of times, I definitely "understand" what it says (infinitely more than you, the xenophobic hatemongers, or the infinitesemaly tiny percentage of "Muslims" who claim it as a reason for their violent/criminal acts). You're the ultimate hypocrite, when you pick and choose when you want to take what these terrorists say at face value. I have a feeling you only do it when people claim they are "following the Quran", but scoff when the reason is something else, in which case you will chalk it up to "mental health" (ie. confederate flag)

    - "Mussulman countries". The correct word is "Muslim" countries. I don't expect much knowledge from you on these subjects, but the fact that you can't get such a mind-numbingly basic term that is repeated countless times right shows how little you care about anything approaching fact. 

    - It's so embarrassing for you, how you mock and deride the value of travelling, claiming that it doesn't "matter" and that it isn't "safe". For anyone with an ounce of sense and insight, the value of experiencing different cultures, lifestyles, mentalities, perspectives, norms, etc is utterly obvious, in terms of expanding one's understanding of the world and it's people. No one is asking you to go to Syria or Iraq. Of course, this is the response one would expect from a xenophobe who believes they can learn everything they need to know about the world following some blogs of a specific ideology from their basement without leaving their "safe" town. 

    How dare you smear almost 2 Billion Muslims in every part of the globe, claiming that they're simply terrorists in the making if "they follow the Quran".  Maybe focus less on your post count, and get out of your house, get some fresh air, and you might *shudder* actually bump into a real life Muslim- and find out they're a normal human being just like you instead of the ridiculous caricatures you've concocted. But I know that's asking too much from someone like you, clearly. I pity you, honestly, because you will likely live your entire natural lifespan in a cesspool of ignorance and fear. 

    Top kek

    Your points would hold more water is Islam weren't responsible for incalculable atrocities.



    Mass genocide, eradication of culture, destruction of repositories of human knowledge that set humanity back 1000 years.

    Religion of peace, sure.


    Let's not forget the fun and games of the Spanish Inquisition (and others) ... Or, the Nazi Pope ...


    FWIW, I am of German, Dutch, Romanian (Jewish) descent, was raised a Christian -- Lutheran, Methodist -- have attended services in Baptist, Catholic (Mariachi Mass) churches. I married a Catholic and she raised our daughter Catholic. I don't believe in any particular organized religion -- but do believe there is/are things greater than we can explain which influence our lives and how we interact with others.


    I detest the use of religion or ethnicity as an excuse or justification for inhumanity.


    Said another way: People are Terrorists -- Religions are not!   There are People who exploit Religion for Terrorism!
     
  • Reply 126 of 183
    isteelersisteelers Posts: 738member
    bsimpsen wrote: »
    It seems to me the same argument could be made about the liability of gun manufacturers. Certainly they've been warned that terrorists might use their products.

    True. I mean phones don't terrorize, people do.
  • Reply 127 of 183
    isteelersisteelers Posts: 738member
    wood1208 wrote: »

    Of course, if you provide opportunity, money, support, bla,bla to all kids,youngs,adults in world than there won't be any terrorism. For that you need to kill all religion and make humanity as religion. Than you need to have one kid rule and if you break than one of parent die so overall world population is leveled. With that world environment and resources won't be depleted so fast and everyone has enough and some more to live happily and not turn to terrorism,war, etc. Can human every do that ? Not really and we are genetically designed(matrix movie) to destroy ourselves at the end.

    War is in our nature. To conquer and take from one another has always been our driving ambition. We try to overcome our nature with rules and government. But you will always have the underlying element to deal with. Religion in itself is not evil. It is the twisting of its core message and the corruption of its leaders that lead to the wars throughout history. We should always try to better ourselves as a species, but I don't think you can eradicate the warlike nature of humans completely.
  • Reply 128 of 183
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,187member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by qvak View Post





    Top kek



    Your points would hold more water is Islam weren't responsible for incalculable atrocities.







    Mass genocide, eradication of culture, destruction of repositories of human knowledge that set humanity back 1000 years.



    Religion of peace, sure.

     

    What an assinine comment. "Islam" isn't responsible for anything. Or is "ISIS", who is killing mostly Muslims, and being fought against mostly by Muslims, considered "Islam" to you?

     

    Mass genocide, eradication of culture, destruction of repositories of human knowledge that set humanity back 1000 years.

     

    So Christianity is not responsible for any of these things? Ever heard of the Cruasades? That wiped out some of the largest and most valuable respositories of science and knowledge. The inquisition? 30 years war? French wars of religion? Ku Klux Klan? ALL these were "in the name of Christianity", yet I don't hold Christianity responsible, but the misguided morons claiming to follow it. Hitler certainly wasn't Muslim - or maybe he secretly was according to you. 

  • Reply 129 of 183
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post



    Need to take away the drugs these people are taking. This is getting ridiculous.



    The "drug" is called power. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The scary thing is how easily the masses can be duped. I'm not sure where we're heading but I think it's going to get real ugly sooner, rather than later.   :embarrass 

  • Reply 130 of 183
    This is overblown. I think Apple's main concern is really centered around ensuring that due process takes place, and that the company isn't used as a shortcut to the established warrant process by law enforcement.
  • Reply 131 of 183
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,511member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

     



    Critical masses explode. But I second the basic concept.


     

    There is a critical mass associated with the collapse (implosion) of a neutron star.

  • Reply 132 of 183
    jb210jb210 Posts: 3member
    I understand "terrorists" have also been seen driving Toyota pickup trucks, and Chevy Suburbans. Will Toyota and GM also be liable for "supporting terrorism"? When will we realize that "terrorism" is no reason to suspend constitutional rights and common sense?!
  • Reply 133 of 183
    mac123mac123 Posts: 5member

    First of all it would be totally "illogical" to assign blame to Apple for the actions of a supposed terrorist. If the government cannot access the contents of the phone, it is encrypted, then how can they "logically say or prove" that Apple is in any way responsible. No evidence, no proof means no guilt.

     

    If the government later does access the phones records and it does show the it was being used by a terrorist then again Apple is not guilty. The fact that the government did unlock the contents of the phone just shows that Apple was in fact not guilty of anything other than selling a phone. The government did in fact have access to the information.

     

    The post is meant to be short because that is all it deserves.

  • Reply 134 of 183
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    You guys. Apple is not liable. They excluded themselves in paragraph 1523 of iTunes Store terms and conditions. If the terrorists click "I Accept" that means they read it. Boom. Done. Not liable.

    Finally, an EULA that serves a useful purpose!

  • Reply 135 of 183
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,521member
    isteelers wrote: »
    War is in our nature. To conquer and take from one another has always been our driving ambition. We try to overcome our nature with rules and government. But you will always have the underlying element to deal with. Religion in itself is not evil. It is the twisting of its core message and the corruption of its leaders that lead to the wars throughout history. We should always try to better ourselves as a species, but I don't think you can eradicate the warlike nature of humans completely.

    War is a cultural acquisition, an aberration, if you take the more recent, modern view. European and Mediterranean Neolithic civilizations went through 3-4 thousand years of development without warfare prior to the third millennium BCE.

    The Bronze Age was a disruption from the peaceful nature-oriented cultures of the Neolithic. Check out the preface to Marija Gimbutas's "Civilization of the Goddess," where she spells out the schism in our history when the Indo-Europeans became the first apocalyptic horsemen from the steppes and who introduced the institutions of patriarchy, conquest, and constant warfare.

    Back on topic, the intel establishment that's been with us since WW 2, no matter who the figurehead president is, plays what it percieves to be the Master Game you speak of, inherited directly from the Indo-European conquerors who now run the world, along with their cosmopolitan Semitic allies. That game is "conquer or be conquered." The difference now is that we have the goods on the psychology of the patriarchists and their sudden appearance in history.
  • Reply 136 of 183
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,056member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post





    Well, there's no accounting for bad taste. I guess the moderators didn't think it was funny either. It's gone.



    And don't be so literal. I wasn't talking about who Boltsfan likes to have sex with, just a part of his identity he might be afraid of that explains his obsession.



    I'm not going to "lighten up" on his kind of baiting.

     

    I understood you weren't specifically talking about Boltsfan's sexuality, however since Tim Cook likes to mention his, repeatedly.  In context it was funny when you consider how ISIS views homosexuality.  It was meant as ironic humor.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Splif View Post

     

    Ronald Reagan's administration illegally sold weapons to the Iranians. Is that who you are talking about?


     

    I don't think he/she was referring to events from 30 years ago when we were helping one country fight a war against a second country who we later fought two wars against.  There's modern examples you could have used for that...

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nevermark View Post

     

     

    You must have a low bar when it comes to recognizing what is going on.

     

    First, chronic terrorism has occurred many places in the world without a link to Islam, so simply saying Islam causes it is ridiculous.  If you want to say fundamentalism (in any religion) can increase the chances of terrorism you would be correct.  Fundamentalism in every major religion has been associated with periods of violence.  But every major religion (including Islam) has also been associated with places and periods of peace and tolerance.  So religion can be a factor but is never the sole cause.

     

    Tellingly, Middle East terrorism is obviously associated with many of the factors associated with terrorism in non-Islam parts of the world:

     

    * Extreme rich/poor divide

    * Repressive governments propped up by more powerful countries

    * Political boundaries set up by external powers that don't match local ethnic boundaries

     

    The first above isn't the fault of the US and other western countries. But extreme rich/poor divides by themselves are usually only associated with local violence.

     

    But the second two have been associated with terrorism in many other places.  And the last century of Middle Eastern history is a laundry list of western countries dictating borders, propping up repressive regimes, etc.  It should not surprise you that kind of interference leads to deep frustration and hate.

     

    And the final cause, is that once there are real reasons for frustration, without some major effort to correct those frustrations they can snowball. Legitimately frustrated powerless people fight back with one of their few options to be heard, terrorism.  More powerful regimes suppress them with the viewpoint they are just responding to the violence, but inevitably harm civilians and ignore the original reasons of frustration.  Now there are two sides with more grievances, and so the violence continues.

     

    The point: Solving terrorism in the Middle East, like anywhere else, requires a lot more insight than "the Islam did it".


    The only time Islam is at peace is when they are in complete control.  The United States has been fighting Islamic terrorists basically since the country was founded.  Does "From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli..." ring a bell?

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    There is all sorts of wrong with your comments, but it's not uncommon. You know that more Americans are killed by "white people", right? Of those, most identify with or were raised as Christian.



    You're an American who has been bombarded with bigotry and ignorance for so long that it can be hard to separate real news from sensational media. I would guess you never classified John Houser (the Layfeyette theater shooter) as a terrorist, and yet that's exactly what he is and he would have labeled as such buy the media instead of just a guy with mental problems had he been Middle Eastern or Islamic.

    Your argument fails because white people aren't killing white people because their religion tells them to.  ISIS and most terrorists attacks against white people are specially because they are following their religion.  One or two people with mental problems does not equate to tens of thousands of people fighting a war for Allah.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    1) Islam is responsible for the actions of Man as much as Christiainity is telson single for a lynching in Alabama.



    2) Islam is now the only religion with with radicals that have committed atrocities? image

     

    In answer to question number 2, Islam isn't, however on the scale that it is happening now across the world, you are going to get those generalizations.  To say otherwise is sticking your head in the sand, no pun intended.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    What an assinine comment. "Islam" isn't responsible for anything. Or is "ISIS", who is killing mostly Muslims, and being fought against mostly by Muslims, considered "Islam" to you?

     

    Mass genocide, eradication of culture, destruction of repositories of human knowledge that set humanity back 1000 years.

     

    So Christianity is not responsible for any of these things? Ever heard of the Cruasades? That wiped out some of the largest and most valuable respositories of science and knowledge. The inquisition? 30 years war? French wars of religion? Ku Klux Klan? ALL these were "in the name of Christianity", yet I don't hold Christianity responsible, but the misguided morons claiming to follow it. Hitler certainly wasn't Muslim - or maybe he secretly was according to you. 


     

    And who were the crusades against?  It takes two sides to fight a war, and you're right, this war has been going on for at least a 1,000 years.  Nice attempt at deflection but that is no excuse for the destruction ISIS is doing to artifacts and historical sights in the Middle East, now, today, as we sit here and debate on the Internet.

     

    And your other points, the Spanish Inquisition ended over 200 years ago, and should be remembered for the evils that man can do to man.  You can see history repeating itself by looking at what's happening now to Christians in Islamic countries.  As for the KKK, the KKK started as a white supremacy organization that slowly turned against most religions with the focus on Catholicism. Today they're nothing more than a fringe wing of the democratic party.

     

    None of this though really pertain to the story at hand...

  • Reply 137 of 183
    I remember when this thread was about Apple.
  • Reply 138 of 183
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post



    Fast and Furious.

    Gun running through Benghazi.

    Current aid to Syrian "rebels".

    Aid to Iran.



    Yeah, who's supporting terrorism again?

     

    Fast and Furious - Started under W and 'Rubber-Stamp' Gonzales

    Gunrunning - Illegal arms trade with Iran under Reagan 

    Aid to 'rebels' - Support of Afghan Mujahideen, who killed Americans and made 9/11 possible by sheltering Bin Laden (Reagan/Bush)

    Aid to middle-east despots - Selling Arms to the Saddam (Reagan/Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney)

     

    Learn history or stop posting crap.

  • Reply 139 of 183
    nobodyynobodyy Posts: 377member

    Here's the thing I think about this: 

     

    If Apple were liable for charges because of their encryption, they will fight it full force, which could be a battle that benefits the entire consumer side of the tech sector. 

  • Reply 140 of 183
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DewMe View Post



    The premise of the argument is deeply rooted in paranoia induced stupidity. It's like claiming that commercial airline manufacturers are complicit in terrorist attacks because they manufacture products that allow bad actors to achieve high speed airborne transport in the commission of their crimes. The worst form of paranoia induced stupidity is Fascism. Perhaps these speculators should interview some survivors of the forced internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII if they are interested in exploring some of the distorted and disturbing consequences of their line of thinking.



    Most importantly, Apple & others could be held liable for NOT securing their platforms enough, enabling terrorists's spying and hijacking networks for their own benefit. 

     

    Does the DoJ really believe that the enemy has no mathematician and no computer geek? Obviously, they're not that stupid. Therefore... FUD.

Sign In or Register to comment.