vvswarup

bulk001 said:

I think she is right. Apple needs to allow 3rd parties to install apps without having to use the AppStore or pay Apple the tax. They could do it like they do with the Mac - install at your own risk from outside sources and call Warren if you get compromised for support.

Why does Apple need to allow 3rd parties to install apps through channels other than the App Store? They're free to buy other phones if they want the freedom to install other apps. Many people are fond of pointing out that the iPhone is an inferior phone but it just happens to have a bunch of sheeple who want to shell out money for it. If that's the case, instead of wasting time demanding that Apple let in other apps, why not buy a phone that's superior to the iPhone and have all that freedom?

jblank said:

Screw her, AOC, who thinks the country is barely above garbage, and the rest of these collectivist leftists that want to destroy our economic system and many great companies, Apple included.

The Democrat Party has turned into a race towards Communism. They are radical and have the gas pedal planted to the firewall to see who can go furthest left. I'm surprised they haven't called for gulags and re-education camps for white males yet, I guess that's coming soon though.

I don't agree with Warren one bit and if she makes the ticket, the Democrats will lose my vote but let's face the facts. Republicans are just as capable of government overreach as Democrats. Let's not forget that Donald Trump and many Republicans called for regulating tech and social media companies like Google or Facebook because they allegedly favored left-leaning content. Donald Trump claimed without a lick of proof that Google intentionally engineered its search algorithm to make posts critical of him appear at the top of results and called for an investigation in response. Trump also repeatedly said Amazon would have a lot of problems if he became President during his campaign. I think I've made my point.

The real problem is populism. Left-wing or right-wing, populism has unintended consequences. People like Warren are the result. 

Does anyone remember what Trump said in the wake of this affair? In a telephone conversation, he said that if he were POTUS, he would have come down so hard on Tim Cook his head would be spinning all the way back to Silicon Valley. I tried as hard as I could to think of what Trump could have possibly meant by that statement but I couldn't think of anything. The only explanation for that statement was that in typical Trump fashion, he was making a strongman statement in order to play to his base. In a television appearance, he called for a boycott of Apple products until Apple until Apple unlocked the phone, although he used some really weird wording. 

It was evident to me back then that Trump had no legal basis to "come down on Tim Cook" because Apple wasn't doing anything illegal in appealing court order. Whatever he was going to do to Apple would have amounted to nothing more than harassment. This is the kind of person we have in the White House-a man who is willing to use the power of the American federal government just to look good to this base. 

anantksundaram said:

I am somewhat puzzled by all the angst and the strong reactions from some here. If the warrant is legit and Apple had the ability or technology to help with any or all of it, they should. If Apple's abilities or the technology does not permit them to help, they can't. End of story. 

I'll tell you why. It was very clear from the start that Apple's abilities and technology do not permit them to hand over the information the government is asking for. The government might as well have gotten a warrant for information stored in the shooter's brain. The only way Apple can comply with the warrant is to spend time developing a tool that doesn't exist now. That was obvious from the very beginning. 

The reason for the strong reactions here is that people are seeing right through the government's rhetoric for what this really is-a clear cut attempt to exploit this incident to further the government's agenda to erode our privacy. 

Governments around the world have gotten the memo that backdoors are a nonstarter. They know that that word alone is enough for their mic to be turned off then and there. Populaces are too smart to believe them about national security. But now, all that politicians are doing is playing with the wording. They're still demonizing tech companies for implementing E2E encryption technology. 

E2E encryption by definition means that only the sender and receiver of encrypted information have the key to decrypt the information. Designing the encryption system with a way to deliberately break makes it weaker. If an unrelated third party keeps an encryption key, it's not E2E any longer and it is inherently less secure than E2E.