Hope worms hack off.your.encrypted Apple.

[SdK]

The idea that the government can't get in or can't buy an apple employee is laughable.

It's the government trying to gain more surveilance.

#TheWesIsTheFuture

[CNS]

Yep.

[MakeItRain]

The idea that the government can't get in or can't buy an apple employee is laughable.

It's the government trying to gain more surveilance.

#TheWesIsTheFuture

I truly believe that they can't get in but they're absolutely trying to gain more surveillance. The "this is a one time thing" has already been blown up.

[Tobias]

yes, go apple, go. The FBI can get mumped.

yes

[CNS]

Police, the FBI, or even Apple should set up voluntary programs where you can register your pass code for their use only in certain(actually legally listed) circumstances.

Sam Harris discussed Apple's current get-mumped stance as wrong on his latest podcast and he did a very poor job in doing so.  He basically said that we don't have the right to create a space that is perfectly impenetrable to all others regardless.  I disagree.  He noted how murderers have been caught because they were actually on video on the phone of their victims, and if they police couldn't get to those vids, those murderers would still be walking free.  Really stupid, imo. 

So, to get around this, voluntarily give the cops your pass code and sign some legal doc giving them permission to use if in cases similar to something Harris would dream up.  If you don't want to?  Too bad for the cops(and you if you murderer goes free, I guess). 

Otherwise, Apple should keep Apple'ing.  They are going to sell so many phones(even more than normal) if they maintain their position and don't create a backdoor.

[Rage Against the McKee]

If I get murdered, it doesn't really matter to me whether the guy who did it gets caught or not. I'm a lot more concerned about my rights being violated when I'm alive than I am about whatever happens after I'm dead.

[catastrophe]

If I get murdered, it doesn't really matter to me whether the guy who did it gets caught or not. I'm a lot more concerned about my rights being violated when I'm alive than I am about whatever happens after I'm dead.

Same. I also have both my and my wife's thumbprint set to unlock my phone. Pretty low chance of that scenario in the first place.

[DQ12]

yay! 

if the government wants access to that kind of information they can get a subpoena.  otherwise, they can suck eggs. 

[michigancat]

So these mother fuckers got in after all. what a bunch of rough ridin' clowns

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/28/472192080/the-fbi-has-successfully-unlocked-the-iphone-without-apples-help

http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-encryption-meltdown-1458690131-lMyQjAxMTI2NTI1NDYyOTQ0Wj

[Tobias]

i hope apple takes this as a challenge going forward

[star seed 7]

Tbt in tears right now 

[The Big Train]

not a good day on the privacy war.  it was probably something stupid like this tho, apple will fix it and only come back stronger like 'bias said

http://www.ibtimes.com/apple-ios-9-passcode-hack-lets-users-break-photos-contacts-without-unlocking-iphone-2111917

[wetwillie]

probably reached out to annonymous

[The Big Train]

i doubt any hacker groups would help the gov in this matter.  there are a lot of human rights things they would help with, but privacy access isnt one of them

[chum1]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

[OK_Cat]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

It has absolutely nothing to do with a dead guy. Once the FBI can break in (and apparently that is now?) then they will be breaking in to any phone they want.

[The Big Train]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

there also isnt a lot of precedence with personal data privacy.  there are millions of facebook profiles that the owner is dead.  based on facebook rules they can't be granted access too without a crap load of red tape, sometimes too much.

this doesnt just apply to what's in your home, most peoples whole lives are in digital form.  where is the line?  this generation has a chance to set the precedent for years to come that the gov can't just intrude on our privacy.

[chum1]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

It has absolutely nothing to do with a dead guy. Once the FBI can break in (and apparently that is now?) then they will be breaking in to any phone they want.

You're worried about the government arbitrarily taking your phone from you?

[chum1]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

there also isnt a lot of precedence with personal data privacy.  there are millions of facebook profiles that the owner is dead.  based on facebook rules they can't be granted access too without a crap load of red tape, sometimes too much.

this doesnt just apply to what's in your home, most peoples whole lives are in digital form.  where is the line?  this generation has a chance to set the precedent for years to come that the gov can't just intrude on our privacy.

I don't see how people's whole lives can be in their phones in a way that they can't be in their homes.

[The Big Train]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

there also isnt a lot of precedence with personal data privacy.  there are millions of facebook profiles that the owner is dead.  based on facebook rules they can't be granted access too without a crap load of red tape, sometimes too much.

this doesnt just apply to what's in your home, most peoples whole lives are in digital form.  where is the line?  this generation has a chance to set the precedent for years to come that the gov can't just intrude on our privacy.

I don't see how people's whole lives can be in their phones in a way that they can't be in their homes.

what is the number 1 way people communicate in todays society?  It's text messaging.  That is a sudo permanent record of thoughts, feelings, personality, etc.  unless you have a flip phone most of your life is on your phone.

[chum1]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

there also isnt a lot of precedence with personal data privacy.  there are millions of facebook profiles that the owner is dead.  based on facebook rules they can't be granted access too without a crap load of red tape, sometimes too much.

this doesnt just apply to what's in your home, most peoples whole lives are in digital form.  where is the line?  this generation has a chance to set the precedent for years to come that the gov can't just intrude on our privacy.

I don't see how people's whole lives can be in their phones in a way that they can't be in their homes.

what is the number 1 way people communicate in todays society?  It's text messaging.  That is a sudo permanent record of thoughts, feelings, personality, etc.  unless you have a flip phone most of your life is on your phone.

I'm asking you to tell me why specifically laws already on the books are insufficient. Like, you don't need a new law that prohibits murder merely because someone just invented a gun.

I don't see good reason to freak out over this.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Weird, the weirdos terrified of guns are the same paranoid weirdos who think the government is going to steal their phone contacts

[The Big Train]

There's a privacy issue? Isn't the phone's owner dead? Is it okay for the government to unlock the door to their house and look for crap? How is this different?

there also isnt a lot of precedence with personal data privacy.  there are millions of facebook profiles that the owner is dead.  based on facebook rules they can't be granted access too without a crap load of red tape, sometimes too much.

this doesnt just apply to what's in your home, most peoples whole lives are in digital form.  where is the line?  this generation has a chance to set the precedent for years to come that the gov can't just intrude on our privacy.

I don't see how people's whole lives can be in their phones in a way that they can't be in their homes.

what is the number 1 way people communicate in todays society?  It's text messaging.  That is a sudo permanent record of thoughts, feelings, personality, etc.  unless you have a flip phone most of your life is on your phone.

I'm asking you to tell me why specifically laws already on the books are insufficient. Like, you don't need a new law that prohibits murder merely because someone just invented a gun.

I don't see good reason to freak out over this.

I personally don't understand or approve of laws being passed in 1789 being an adequate law for 2016 jurisdiction.  The simple fact the FBI was using the All Writs Act should tell you all you need to know about the relevance of the current laws and precedence.

http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/17/why-apple-is-fighting-not-to-unlock-iphones-for-the-government/

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

If the government needs information in connection with a criminal investigation, they can get a warrant or subpoena. If Apple doesn't want to cooperate theyou can be held in contempt. It's absurd they won't cooperate.

[The Big Train]

its not apple's job to keep the country safe, its the governments.  private companies shouldn't be held accountable for a consumer device that was used in such a way, when the government already monitors the activity.