wiggin

coolfactor said:

How many millions of dollars is Apple's new campus pouring into that economy, and he has the nerve to demand even more? That doesn't seem right.

Probably almost none. I'd bet that nearly all of the companies and contractors working on the project are located outside of Cupertino. Even Apple's own employees who live outside of Cupertino probably contribute very little to the city's revenues on an individual basis.

It's not any different from people who live in Virginia or Maryland and work in DC. Or live in NW Indiana and work in Chicago. The mayor's plan of charging a $1000/head tax is pretty stupid, but the city does have a right to collect revenue to pay for the roads and services that the city provides to the benefit of Apple and it's employees, even if they live outside of the city limits. Hard to say if what Apple is already paying is a fair amount or not without more information, but first he needs to make a case and provide a rational justification for his proposals. Just saying "you're the biggest employer in town, give us more money" isn't a very good strategy.

bkkcanuck said:

anantksundaram said:

What 'favoritism'? In what way is Samsung treated differently in India? And 'protectionism'? It's exactly the same playing field that everyone selling CE has, competing there.

I agree that it will come back to bite the country the ass. Just as the lack of freedoms in China will, or the corruption in Brazil will. But those are currently the facts on the ground. You should take them into account if you want play there, or take your ball and go somewhere else.

Or lobby your government to retaliate....

How do we think the US government would respond if a foreign company requested to import used goods for sale into the US? Is anyone aware of an example of this? Folks are bashing India, and it seems clear that they do practice some protectionism; but the additional twist here is that it's used merchandise (regardless of how well it was refurbished). Many companies sell small quantities of refurbished items. I've purchased refurbished Macs and iPads from Apple. But it sounds like Apple's plan was to bring rather large quantities into an Indian market that they can't otherwise compete in. Can we say with certainty that the US government wouldn't make the same decision?

Not to mention, I wonder if Samsung ad execs were salivating at the opportunity to run ads in India representing iPhones as used, second-hand devices. If Apple did manage to sell enough used iPhones to noticeably bump up their market share, I'd think they'd also be at risk of damaging their brand in India by being subject to this kind of marketing by the competition.

tallest skil said:

wigeon said:
Would you also state that the FBI has no business finding better ways to breach doors to arrest criminals or rescue hostages just because you inconveniently also have a door on the front of your house.

Yes, because if you want an argument that isn’t disingenuous you’ll have to pretend that the FBI is calling for every single door in the country to be unlockable with a single key.

I guess I missed the press release where the FBI was calling for a vulnerable OS to be pre-installed on every iPhone sold.

If you are a suspected criminal and are being investigated, it doesn't matter if it's a door or a phone, it's the FBI's responsibility to carry out their investigation within the bounds of the laws that govern their activities (which includes obtaining the necessary warrants for any searches).

[And here is where you claim that the FBI is always investigating all of us.]

If you don't like that they could break through your door,  you are welcome to build a better door (or for Apple to build a better phone). But to suggest that the FBI shouldn't ever research ways to carry out their duties is the disingenuous argument. How about we also state that they can't ever fire their weapons in training to prepare for carrying out their duties. I'm sure they'll be able to figure it out when they are faced with an armed hostage taker. And why bother researching how to investigate terrorist bombings or other forensic techniques. I'm sure they will have plenty of time figure out how to do that after the event has taken place.

Like any other profession, you train, and practice and conduct research to find ways to do your job more effectively. But, you still need to be held accountable for performing your job responsibly and ethically. No, the FBI should not have asked Apple to help in the way that they did. But that does not mean the FBI doesn't have a responsibility to prepare to carry out their duties to investigate crimes, even if that means figuring out a way to break into a phone that is used by a suspected criminal.

cali said:

steven n. said:

Completely disagree. This is exactly how the FBI should be doing their business. Apple should continue to tighten security and the FBI should continue to find ways into phones and pass security. Cat and mouse.

The FBI trying to force Apple to write code is wrong on oh sooo many levels. The FBI learning tech and how to break it is good on so many levels. 

The FBI has no business finding ways to unlock our phones. Apple does indeed have every right to know. Would you like the FBI finding ways into your iPhone, your TV, computer, wifi, security cameras etc?

BTW The "end world hunger" reference was a bad joke. I only said it because the FBI made it seem like unlocking Farook's work phone would bring world peace or something.


This brings up an interesting question for me. WHAT exactly did they "extract" from the phone?

Theyre being super vague and it could mean anything. Could just be call history and they're being passive aggressive to make Apple look inferior.

Clearly you have little understanding of what the FBI's job is (whether you like or agree with it). Their mandate is to investigate crimes and suspected criminals. So, in fact, they have every business finding ways to unlock the phones of suspected criminals. It's inconvenient that you happen to use the same phone as suspected criminals. Would you also state that the FBI has no business finding better ways to breach doors to arrest criminals or rescue hostages just because you inconveniently also have a door on the front of your house.

Yes, it's important to have a discussion about how they go about carrying out their mandated duties. But to state that they have "no business" carrying out those duties is a bit ignorant and self-serving, don't you think?

mnbob1 said:

wiggin said:

This really isn't a 4th Amendment question. The FBI is operating well within those bounds in wanting to access the data on the phone. The search is reasonable and even has the support of the owner of the phone. It comes down to if Apple can be required/compelled to assist in those efforts, which would seem to fall more under freedom of speech (or in this case, freedom to refuse speech...in the form of computer code).

For those who are worried about their privacy should a tool be created which would allow brute for attacks on iPhones, the solution is simple. Use the alphanumeric passcode option and don't use a stupid password. And don't use Touch ID, either.

The owner is dead. I guess that is giving support since he can't refuse.
 

You might want to actually try reading the various news articles and other accounts. The owner of the phone is the county. It was the guy's work phone. And the county, the owner of the phone, has consented to the search of the phone.