muppetry

prox said:

ibill said:

Do you have a source for that claim, or are you just making stuff up?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3456654/Apple-refusing-unlock-San-Bernardino-terrorist-s-phone-ask-did-seemingly-let-China-secret-data-security-checks-year.html I think if you do a Google Search plenty more articles can be found.

Ah - you mean a bunch of speculation about how Apple convinced the Chinese government that there were no backdoors, primarily comprising the assertion that in doing so they gave them a backdoor. Is that your idea of evidence?

If that is as it appears to be, then the FBI's credibility score just lost a good few points.

icoco3 said:

Soli said:

Yes and yes.

Now that we have that cleared up, these bigots have every right to choose not to buy Apple products because of their intolerant beliefs, but they are 

So you see no distinction between civil rights, and using your religion as a justification to back up your hate speech? So you support a religions that persecute Jews, refer to "the blacks" as an inferior sub-species, and think so little of women that female circumcision is an acceptable practice.

And yet you're arguing against Tim Cook's right to freedom of speech.

Don't forget, that goes both ways.  Funny how those that espouse "tolerance" of other opinions are so intolerant of those who do not conform to their opinions.

I don't think so. You are conflating the right to hold and express opinions with the right to take actions that negatively affect others. It's fine to disapprove of gays, ethnicities, races, or any other group of people, but it's not fine to discriminate against them by denying them services or rights that are afforded to others of whom you do not disapprove. And suggesting that someone, or some group, religious or otherwise, cease discriminating is not the same as discriminating against them. This argument is so fatuous that it's hard to believe that it keeps being raised.

He's simply making the pragmatic point that such a back door would make some investigations easier for law enforcement agencies, who are tasked with stopping this kind of event. I don't think that one should criticize the FBI too much for asking for all the assistance that they can get. It is up to the courts to protect Apple, and others, from undue burden as a result.

HarriePW said:

There is far more to this than just breaking in to the iPhone. There is a great blog article by a Forensics expert regarding this wish of the FBI. He explains how one of the biggest problems is when things hit the courts and information found on the phone is involved. Here is the URL to the article. I found it extremely enlightening as I had never thought about this part of the problem. http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645

Very interesting article. Thanks.