"The question of how to balance government surveillance with individual privacy is really quite simple. On one side the government believes that the investigation of someone who is either planning or has actually carried out a crime should be without any conditions, that all evidence potentially relating to the event should be accessible to law enforcement. On the other side, citizens have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their day to day activities, meaning that the government should have to demonstrate indisputable “probable cause” to a judge before undertaking any intrusion into an individual’s private space. And even then, the intrusion should be narrowly defined to include only the actual criminal activity under investigation."That's the mainstream version of the debate.
"Cook did not note his other concern—creating a backdoor for the U.S. government would cost Apple much of its huge overseas market, after consumers there turned to other phones with unbreakable encryption. It would be devastating for the company."Apple real concern.
Mom of man killed by terrorist sides with Apple.
DOJ blames marketing for Apple's position, and that's a perfectly good reason for it.
NC senator wants to criminalize Apple's refusal.
Government changed the iPhone's password, instigating all these problems.
Loon McAfee offers to crack terrorist's iPhone for FBI. Idiot doesn't seem to know he'd be opening Pandora's box.
Robots produce perfect legal briefs, reducing the need for lawyers.
Judge orders FBI to turn over code it used to hack and run child pornography site.
No comments:
Post a Comment