I have the answer to the Apple/FBI problem

Wow. Lois. For someone who is rabidly anti-gun you sure dipped to new lows to make an argument. Plus how did we get from your thread Title and post.... to this? And finally....I'm betting 10 to 1 that that isn't your writing anyways. You copied and pasted that from somewhere. That's not your voice. Unless....you have different voices?
I would take that 10 to 1 bet. It is certainly more wordy than usual for Lois, and she may have paraphrased from different sources, but I am betting it is her paraphrasing. It's far more wordy, and she doesn't usually emotionally plead so passionately like the writing in that big block. I suspect that she will let us know. Remember that you gave 10 to 1 odds. So if I win, that's 10 points for me. Ha ha. You're joking right? I don't know what she'll let us know.
I don’t know if there are any 2nd amendment types here but they have often said they fear our own government knowing who has guns. With the privacy controls removed, any information about gun ownership that found its way onto phones will be PUBLIC INFORMATION available to the big bad US government, who we know will come to confiscate their guns, and will also be available to any foreign government ot terrorist organization who wants to know who has guns and where they are.
This Tim?!?! Does this look like something Lois would write? No!

I mean actually what’s worse?

Please! THINK before you join those who would force Apple to break its security code because they’re a big bad corporation, who only wants to make a lot of money and doesn’t care about terrorism. They may be doing more to prevent terrorism by keeping the code locked down. Yet people run around calling Apple traitors and demons because they want to keep their technology secret. THINK!
and then this....Lois doesn't write stuff like this.
Wow. Lois. For someone who is rabidly anti-gun you sure dipped to new lows to make an argument. Plus how did we get from your thread Title and post.... to this? And finally....I'm betting 10 to 1 that that isn't your writing anyways. You copied and pasted that from somewhere. That's not your voice. Unless....you have different voices?
I would take that 10 to 1 bet. It is certainly more wordy than usual for Lois, and she may have paraphrased from different sources, but I am betting it is her paraphrasing. It's far more wordy, and she doesn't usually emotionally plead so passionately like the writing in that big block. I suspect that she will let us know. Remember that you gave 10 to 1 odds. So if I win, that's 10 points for me. Ha ha. You're joking right? I don't know what she'll let us know. I think that Lois is honest. If she cut and pasted, I think that she would 'fess up. And, I AM joking, but I still want my 10 points.
And, I AM joking, but I still want my 10 points.
If you're joking about Lois fessing up....you can have ten points. :-)
And, I AM joking, but I still want my 10 points.
If you're joking about Lois fessing up....you can have ten points. :-) I am joking, because I like to joke. I am not joking about Lois fessing up. If she does, you get 1 point. If she says that you are wrong, then, and only then, will I expect and accept my 10 points.
These devices are used for everything. They are used to store and make financial transactions. They have all of our contacts. There are to-do lists on them and while many people don't know this they store a record of every place you have every been.
Yeah, hello? You mean all the stuff any government has every right to obtain a search warrant on? "These devices are used for everything." Yeah, no kidding!
Such information falling into the hands of law enforcement cold do tremendous damage to someone or cold be used as leverage to violate that individuals rights ( ie. Admit that you unwittingly helped a terrorist or we tell your wife that you visit brothels)
The cops already have the power to do this through many outlets. They have done it occasionally for centuries. The fact that this happens(very infrequently in the US) doesn't necessitate the exclusion of a device you just admitted has tons of information on it that could be seriously useful to the police.
This isn't like giving police a one time warrant to search someones home. This is giving them an open door to examine everyone's life.
Hyperbole much? Get someone else to make the argument Mac... Our government has the authority to request a limited warrant to search for certain information when they have sufficient suspicion that a crime has or will be committed, however giving the government the key to a single phone gives them access to far more information about a person than they could have ever acquired through a traditional warrant allowing them to search a person, a home, or a car. The deeper we allow the government to dig into our personal lives the greater the risk of abuse. You know as well as I that this isn't a theoretical possibility. Abuses are going to happen. They already do. This will magnify those abuses significantly. As far as the hyperbole, absolutely not. Do you own a smart phone? If you do, do you use it for anything other than making phone calls? Anyone who isn't a Luddite these days quite literally has their life on that cell phone. That's the furthest thing from hyperbole. Its a fact. Its a misnomer to call it a cell phone. These devices are powerful portable computers and personal databases as well as 24/7 tracking devices. Until now its been safe to use them and allow them to track and document every aspect of our lives because its protected with high level encryption. There is no way to create a one time key that unlocks a single phone. Once they create a workaround for the security features on these devices it can be used on anyone's device. So no this isn't hyperbole. Allowing this one time access will in effect give police open access to everyone's life and the cost of entry will be nothing more than a plausible story that convinces a judge to allow a warrant. I want to catch terrorists as much as the next guy, but our history and world history is full of examples of what can go wrong when police and governments are given too much power. Most terrorists want to do us harm but their opportunities are limited. Few police want to do us harm but their opportunities are extensive. Undiscovered terrorists and unrestricted governments are both a danger to us. We shouldn't be so afraid of one that we take our eye off the other.

Good article on why Apple should hold out against the FBI.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/real-stakes-apples-fight-fbi

Wow. Lois. For someone who is rabidly anti-gun you sure dipped to new lows to make an argument. Plus how did we get from your thread Title and post.... to this? I was merely adding ammunition to my argument. It doesn't mean I agree with anything the gun lobby stands for. But I would wager that a lot of the gun nuts are also calling for Apple to give up their security system. I was simply trying to tell them that their stance could backfire on them and cause them grief. And finally....I'm betting 10 to 1 that that isn't your writing anyways. You copied and pasted that from somewhere. That's not your voice. Unless....you have different voices?
It is my writing--100%. I am actually a professional writer and editor. I've been a journalist for most of my career. I don't always take the time to write in my journalistic "voice." That takes a lot more time and work than responding to discussion group posts.

Pleasure betting with you Vyasma. Those 10 points feel ever so good.

Wow. Lois. For someone who is rabidly anti-gun you sure dipped to new lows to make an argument. Plus how did we get from your thread Title and post.... to this? And finally....I'm betting 10 to 1 that that isn't your writing anyways. You copied and pasted that from somewhere. That's not your voice. Unless....you have different voices?
I would take that 10 to 1 bet. It is certainly more wordy than usual for Lois, and she may have paraphrased from different sources, but I am betting it is her paraphrasing. It's far more wordy, and she doesn't usually emotionally plead so passionately like the writing in that big block. I suspect that she will let us know. Remember that you gave 10 to 1 odds. So if I win, that's 10 points for me. Ha ha. You're joking right? I don't know what she'll let us know. I think that Lois is honest. If she cut and pasted, I think that she would 'fess up. And, I AM joking, but I still want my 10 points. I would. When I cut an paste I always include the source. If anyone thinks he can find anything, anywhere that I cut an pasted from, feel free to do the research. Tim, you get your 10 points.
Lois-The FBI should hire a hacker. A hacker would know how to break the Apple code in minutes. It would give the FBI what it wants and Apple would be off the hook. Why are they wasting time, money and manpower hounding Apple?
So Lois, I didn't realize you were a journalist. Are you for the government being able to hack these devices or not? I'm kind of confused... Or here, here's your out. The government can hack into phones, it just can't compel companies to help them? Is that what you meant by "Apple being off the hook"? Yeah this was a great article..
ACLU Article-For the government, every device connected to the Internet will be more than just a novel convenience—it will be a new window into your home. The fridge that responds to your verbal commands might have a backdoor to allow for remote listening. The TV that allows you to video chat with your family might be commandeered into a ready-made spy camera.
Yeah that's good sh&t there... edit....bold type on refrigerator part
Its a misnomer to call it a cell phone. These devices are powerful portable computers and personal databases as well as 24/7 tracking devices. Until now its been safe to use them and allow them to track and document every aspect of our lives because its protected with high level encryption. There is no way to create a one time key that unlocks a single phone. Once they create a workaround for the security features on these devices it can be used on anyone's device. So no this isn't hyperbole. Allowing this one time access will in effect give police open access to everyone's life and the cost of entry will be nothing more than a plausible story that convinces a judge to allow a warrant.
The government can look at bank accounts, inside your house, inside your car, everywhere in fact, when they obtain a warrant. When the courts and judges and law enforcement create warrants....just like it says in the Constitution. I'm sure people go ape shit when they get audited and the government is allowed to look into most of their finances too. That's the law. There is history of these laws being abused. It's not some rampant problem though. That doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I want to catch terrorists as much as the next guy
I do not doubt that.
Pleasure betting with you Vyasma. Those 10 points feel ever so good.
go ahead...take 'em.
Its a misnomer to call it a cell phone. These devices are powerful portable computers and personal databases as well as 24/7 tracking devices. Until now its been safe to use them and allow them to track and document every aspect of our lives because its protected with high level encryption. There is no way to create a one time key that unlocks a single phone. Once they create a workaround for the security features on these devices it can be used on anyone's device. So no this isn't hyperbole. Allowing this one time access will in effect give police open access to everyone's life and the cost of entry will be nothing more than a plausible story that convinces a judge to allow a warrant.
The government can look at bank accounts, inside your house, inside your car, everywhere in fact, when they obtain a warrant. When the courts and judges and law enforcement create warrants....just like it says in the Constitution. I'm sure people go ape shit when they get audited and the government is allowed to look into most of their finances too. That's the law. There is history of these laws being abused. It's not some rampant problem though. That doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I want to catch terrorists as much as the next guy
I do not doubt that. Your right. I am not so desperate to catch a terrorist that I would be willing to throw the baby out with the bath water as you put it. I prefer not to trash our liberties because someone at the CIA wants to make their job a little easier. To be honest you have no idea how often the government has abused their power but I prefer not to find out. Its much easier to ruin someone's life when every detail lies behind one door. More difficult when you have to dig and search in dozens of locations that still don't have the same level of detail. If it weren't, the government wouldn't be so hot to get their hands on it. The very thing that makes this data so useful is exactly what makes it so dangerous.
Your right. I am not so desperate to catch a terrorist that I would be willing to throw the baby out with the bath water as you put it. I prefer not to trash our liberties because someone at the CIA wants to make their job a little easier. To be honest you have no idea how often the government has abused their power but I prefer not to find out. Its much easier to ruin someone's life when every detail lies behind one door. More difficult when you have to dig and search in dozens of locations that still don't have the same level of detail. If it weren't, the government wouldn't be so hot to get their hands on it. The very thing that makes this data so useful is exactly what makes it so dangerous.
Jesus, what kind of private life do you lead MaGeyver? Wow this goes deeper than I thought. Talk about paranoia...yikes. I hope you don't have a refrigerator that's hooked up to the internet. What'll you do then?
Lois-The FBI should hire a hacker. A hacker would know how to break the Apple code in minutes. It would give the FBI what it wants and Apple would be off the hook. Why are they wasting time, money and manpower hounding Apple?
So Lois, I didn't realize you were a journalist. Are you for the government being able to hack these devices or not? I'm kind of confused... I am against the government forcing individuals and corporations who are not under indictment or material witnesses to a crime from being forced to provide the government with access to private material. In this case, I think Apple is doing the right thing--the legal thing--not only for itself but, as it turns out, for every person who uses the internet or a cell phone. I am for the rule of law and our Constitutional right to privacy and for businesses' right to keep their technology secret, and I don't think even the government should be able to circumvent it. In this case, if the FBI can figure out a way to get into that one phone, they will do it, but they shouldn't be able to force Apple to provide their security secrets. In addition, if the FBI can do it, the cat may also be out of the bag and everyone's personal information will be vulnerable, just as I outlined in the piece I wrote. At that point Apple will have to create some kind of fix, but it may be too late to save people's private information that was on iPhones. Or here, here's your out. The government can hack into phones, it just can't compel companies to help them? Is that what you meant by "Apple being off the hook"? Who is going to stop the government from hacking into phones that are evidence to a crime if they can do it? They don't need a court order to do that. I meant that, from a legal standpoint, Apple is off the hook when it comes to the governmemt forcing them to cooperate. Legally, Apple is an innocent bystander in this case, and to force them to cooperate would be unConstitutional, in my opinion.. Yeah this was a great article..
ACLU Article-For the government, every device connected to the Internet will be more than just a novel convenience—it will be a new window into your home. The fridge that responds to your verbal commands might have a backdoor to allow for remote listening. The TV that allows you to video chat with your family might be commandeered into a ready-made spy camera.
Yeah that's good sh&t there... edit....bold type on refrigerator part
I am against the government forcing individuals and corporations who are not under indictment or material witnesses to a crime from being forced to provide the government with access to private material. In this case, I think Apple is doing the right thing--the legal thing--not only for itself but, as it turns out, for every person who uses the internet or a cell phone. I am for the rule of law and our Constitutional right to privacy and for businesses' right to keep their technology secret, and I don't think even the government should be able to circumvent it. In this case, if the FBI can figure out a way to get into that one phone, they will do it, but they shouldn't be able to force Apple to provide their security secrets. In addition, if the FBI can do it, the cat may also be out of the bag and everyone's personal information will be vulnerable, just as I outlined in the piece I wrote. At that point Apple will have to create some kind of fix, but it may be too late to save people's private information that was on iPhones.
In my opinion it's a very fine line between condoning the government hacking a device and being against an entity cooperating with the government to hack a device that was owned by a terrorist. Cooperating being a key word here. Just on a lazy day vernacular here, what's wrong with cooperation? Cooperation is what makes the world go round. The government has already stated publicly that Apple is doing this for their image. A valuable asset no doubt. Hopefully some winds of change gonna blow soon...I'm a little surprised you're taking the side of a corporation like Apple. Also that appeal to gun owners you made, knowing your hearty stance on that issue...a little frantic. Cheap really. How beholden to Apple are you? The ends justify the means..no? The whole piece wreaked of hysteria.(it really did.) I guess you're worried about refrigerators listening in on ya too?
Your right. I am not so desperate to catch a terrorist that I would be willing to throw the baby out with the bath water as you put it. I prefer not to trash our liberties because someone at the CIA wants to make their job a little easier. To be honest you have no idea how often the government has abused their power but I prefer not to find out. Its much easier to ruin someone's life when every detail lies behind one door. More difficult when you have to dig and search in dozens of locations that still don't have the same level of detail. If it weren't, the government wouldn't be so hot to get their hands on it. The very thing that makes this data so useful is exactly what makes it so dangerous.
Jesus, what kind of private life do you lead MaGeyver? Wow this goes deeper than I thought. Talk about paranoia...yikes. I hope you don't have a refrigerator that's hooked up to the internet. What'll you do then? Well if my fridge were hooked up I would be in serious trouble but thankfully its only my phone :-) The point is that you don't even need to have something to hide. Here are the problems as I see them 1) Post Hoc analysis of data can create patterns that don't really exist. Lets say you think someone committed a crime, maybe a burglary. You get access to their phone and in there you find that they searched a few sites about pot ( maybe they saw a story about pot legalization and were worried that a dispensary might be opening up in their neighborhood). On another day you see that they went to an apartment building where a known drug dealer lives ( they were visiting someone different who lives ten floors below but GPS tracking only gives the building not the floor). Later that day they are driving home from work and happened to stop at an intersection where a street level drug dealer stopped 30 seconds ago ( the time stamps on GPS are not necessarily accurate to the minute). A pattern begins to appear here even though one does not exist. POlice who have already convicted this person in their minds are looking for patterns and may think they see one here. 2) The CIA thinks that software can be written that will allow the good guys to access these phones and can be kept out of the hands of bad guys. First, that can n ever be guaranteed and in fact will not happen. Other governments and criminal organizations will make it their job to get their hands on this software. Its far too valuable to not try and steal it. The "bad guys" will eventually obtain the software with potentially devastating consequences. Secondly there is no such thing as good guys and bad guys. its all a matter of perspective. Police may be mostly "good" from our point of view as Americans and law abiding citizens but have engaged in criminal acts and are often corrupt to one degree or another. I'm not sure how this will be settled. I can see both sides of the argument but giving the government open access to all of this information needs to require something more than the simple warrant requests procedure as it exists today. Whatever entity that has access to this technology needs citizen oversight. I'm not sure if this is possible but perhaps the technology could be designed so that it could be broken into pieces so no single person or entity possesses all the parts with the ability decrypt the phone. This way even if someone stole the soft ware they wouldnt be able to use it without having the other parts. Here's a video that briefly looks at both sides. http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/22/technology/fbi-director-james-comey-apple-san-bernardino-iphone/index.html?iid=hp-toplead-dom