JeffA2
About
- Username
- JeffA2
- Joined
- Visits
- 10
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- -113
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 82
Reactions
-
Apple says San Bernardino iPhone case is 'unprecedented,' cannot be decided in a vacuum
Wow...where did that come from? Are you actually saying that the San Bernadino killer was not a terrorist? That this was an 'ordinary' domestic crime that has no national security concerns? I agree that we shouldn't overreact but this wasn't some couple knocking over a 7-11. There are legitimate security concerns here.rob53 said:
I'm tired of the terrorist label. It's used for anything and everything. There were more than one phone, it's just that the iPhone was the only one left intact. As for the fourteen people murdered, I like that word better than calling it a terrorist action. The murderer knew the people, he worked with them. Unfortunately, murders happen every day of every year. So does theft of personal information. Just because one judge demands Apple do something that's not allowed by law (read everything, don't just listen to Fox News) doesn't mean Apple hasn't cooperated. They have. Just because a judge demands something doesn't mean that judge knows what they're doing. They're human so not perfect. Sometimes judges need to be reminded what their job is and what limits there are on that job. I won't even go into the FBI since it continues to operate like it did when J. Edgar Hoover turned it into the equivalent of the Schutzstaffel (look it up), which is how it operates to this day. It's amazing how common citizens are required to abide by laws while the FBI and the other government underground organizations can do what ever they want to do, regardless of whether it's against the law. Oh, I forgot, you don't care about the law, all you care about it trying to get rid of terrorists.tpkatsa said:This is a federal terrorism investigation. The privacy issue is moot because the ONE phone in question belonged to a terrorist who is now dead. Apple needs to be very careful with this. Being perceived to be on the wrong side of an FBI investigation of a terrorist act where 14 people were murdered can't be good for Apple's image. There are times to stick up for privacy rights, such as when the government tries to do things without a warrant, or otherwise tries to circumvent the process, but not when the government has a court order from a federal judge for assistance with a dead terrorist's phone. Apple needs to do the right thing here and help the feds get any and all information that will help us understand what led to the murder of 14 people - anything less is a disgrace and an affront to those who perished in the attack.
And you are totally correct that judges do make mistakes. That's what the appeal process is for. But the ultimate judgement is not up to Apple. They can make their case but they are not the decider in a democratic society.
-
On Steve Jobs's birthday, don't forget those who made his story possible
I can tell that some of the youngsters are a bit frustrated with all the name dropping of dead people. But if you get curious about even one of them and google them, it will have been worth it. Lots of people know about Jobs and Gates and Woz but they're the tip of a very big iceberg. It's worth looking under the water sometime! And Steve's b'day is a perfectly good excuse to learn about it (he wouldn't mind, he knew some of these folks).
-
On Steve Jobs's birthday, don't forget those who made his story possible
Very nice summary! It does glide over the theoretical foundations of computing a bit. Alan Turing didn't just make a useful machine that sped up breaking the Enigma machine. He also laid the foundational theory of the programmable finite-state automaton that became known as a 'Turing Machine.' I'd also note the contributions of Alonzo Church, Kurt Gödel, John von Neumann, Noam Chomsky, Andrey Markov and others.
You mention Doug Engelbart's famous demo, but Ivan Sutherland and David Evan's pioneering work in computer graphics was equally influential in the development of modern human-computer interaction.
The software that powers our modern interfaces wouldn't be possible without the likes of Edsgar Dijkstra ("goto considered harmful"), Niklaus Wirth (Algol, Pascal), Donald Knuth ("The Art of Computer Programming", TeX and more) and many, many others.
This could go on all day -- we truly are standing on the shoulders of giants. -
FBI director says iPhone unlock demands are limited, won't 'set a master key loose'
You don't get to make that judgment. Whether you agree with the FBI's request or find it an attack on privacy, these investigators have a legal warrant to search that phone. Your opinion of the odds don't come into it at all.metamancer said:The assinine presumption is that there is anything of significance on the phone in the first place. I am guessing the odds are there is really nothing of import on the phone, and yet if the FBI prevails, all that will be accomplished is the precedent of forcing law-abiding citizens to go above and beyond to aid authorities. Methinks that is the real intent, and the contents of said phone is irrelevant to Comey. Any words about "Justice" and the "victims' families" are just grandstanding BS.
-
Donald Trump says Apple should back down in San Bernardino case
This a weakly thought out argument. The differences between the parties are rather profound. For example: size of government, gun rights, abortion rights, gay marriage, health care, immigration, climate change, evolution and the role of science in public policy, interventionist foreign policy etc. The reason that actual changes in policy are small and incremental is because we live in an era of divided government. And that's a reflection of a very real divide in public opinion. The federal government was deliberately designed by the founders to work very slowly when broad consensus isn't available. That's how the US Constitution works. So it won't matter if a socialist like Sanders gets elected -- he will have virtually no ability to implement radical change. Ditto for a far-right candidate like Cruz. But that's not because Sanders and Cruz agree on anything. It's because the rest of the country is genuinley divided about the future.SpamSandwich said:
And I don't want either to be given total fascistic power. "Democrat" and "Republican" are just words. The actual differences between parties has been approaching zero. The biggest difference is in the rhetoric. Look at the difference between what Obama has said in his speeches versus what he's actually done. A person would have to be willfully blind to not see what is plain as day.apple ][ said:I'm a Trump supporter (obviously), but I don't want to give any capability to the Obama Admin, not even for five minutes.
Trump doesn't appear to be committed to the US Constitution or the rule of law so I have no idea what would happen if he actually got into office. I hope we never find out.
