|
I thought the same thing when I first read it.
|
|
|
|
|
That says a whole lot more about you than it does about OG.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
It says that OG tells terrible jokes and I tell rude ones.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: If you swim with mammals, are you made to feel whalecome?
Are there a lot of seamen floating around?
|
|
|
|
|
Apple Fights Order to Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone[^].
Normally I would side with Apple, but I live 20 minutes from San Bernadino so this one hits home.
The Gov isn't asking hem to unlock EVERYONE's phone - just this one. It could start a dangerous precedent, but I think the opportunity to discover valuable intel trumps Apple.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Would the term precedent mean anything? - once they open pandora's box they can't close it.
Just a thought if the incident had happened in Sidcup rather than San Bernardino (i.e. not somewhere close to home for you as a person), would you still be saying the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. It's hard to decide what the right balance is. While I believe that each of us has a right to our privacy, the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
On this I agree, but I am not convinced that setting a precedent which allows the unlocking of phones and possibly reducing the security of many other users to do it represents the many over the few.
|
|
|
|
|
But the problem is; who decides if it's for the good of the many?
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
The courts. Just like getting a warrant for anything else. The authorities would have to prove "just cause" to obtain a warrant.
If your spouse, child or parent were being held hostage and the authorities got the phone of one of the abductors, and it was hoped that information in the phone might help lead to their recovery, wouldn't it be worth it?
|
|
|
|
|
Just cause is a very broad term.
I was pulled over in Texas and they searched me and the vehicle that I was driving because the officer said that my Garmin was obstructing my view. It was on the windshield under the rear view mirror just like thousands of other people. He stopped me because I had long hair and he just knew I was transporting drugs.
In other words just cause is a fabrication, it can be anything.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
NOT so -- in the case of getting a warrant or court order. The authorities have to PROVE that just cause exists to a judge. In your case (which I'm sure happens a lot more than we realize), the officer "bluffed" just cause which may or may not have held up in court after the fact if the stop had been challenged. To get a warrant or court order - they start off in court proving their case
|
|
|
|
|
the good of the many outweighs the good of the one
well the world does not work this way (or neither of us would sit in front of a computer and talk about this) - remember: we (as in the west) are not the many when you see it globally
And the context here really matters: it's not for the good of anyone if Apple give in - the bad will just go and use some other - more secure - means of communication, while we all would lose even more of our privacy.
“If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy.”
(Philip Zimmermann)
|
|
|
|
|
GStrad wrote: once they open pandora's box they can't close it
Yes they can. Lots and lots of legal decisions - both good and bad - get overturned every day.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
legal precedents are harder to over turn than they are to not create in the first place and I was lso thinking of this:
Quote: "asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone" — something he described as "too dangerous to create."
pandora's box, that would be exploited by criminals and legally allowed representatives alike. Really bad idea!
|
|
|
|
|
GStrad wrote: asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone
Ah, yes. That's certainly a nasty box. I was thinking purely of the legal rights.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
But why go to Apple? Just hire 2-3 really good phone hackers and they'll get in within a week.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal and any evidence uncovered would be inadmissible in any U.S. court. Law enforcement wouldn't be use any incriminating evidence, if found, to levy charges against any other accomplices.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
|
|
|
|
|
If Mr. Cook chooses to ignore a court order, then Mr. Cook should be held in contempt of court.
Isn't this what would happen to the rest of us?
|
|
|
|
|
Of course it would. I can't see any good reason why Apple can't unlock this one phone.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think he's simply going to "ignore" the ruling, they're going to appeal the decision. I'm sure Apple has an army of lawyers.
|
|
|
|
|
at first i as reading this as Mr. Crook, not Cook.
Yeah Mr. Crook is ignoring court order.
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Franklin: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
'nuff said.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
He said that right before he discovered electricity and changed the world.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
 
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
