TexasCHLforum.com

As long as your drawbridge was not owned by the city you lived in and used during the committment of capital murder by terrorists who are NOT ISIS affiliated, you seem to have a clear cut infallible argument. Just to be clear.....you require that TWO conditions be met: (1) not municipally owned (in my example it is privately owned on my land), and (2) not used during the commitment of terrorist murder. I rather suspect that you meant "OR" instead of "and". Since my example excluded municipal ownership, the clear implication is that I no longer own the rights to my own property if someone else beyond my control misuses it for terrorist purposes. According to that position, if I have some tenuous connection of which I may not even be aware (coworker of, distantly related to, attended the same mosque/church at some point, college roommates with, 3rd cousin of a friend, etc.) with a person who turns out to be an ISIS terrorist, and that ISIS terrorist uses my drawbridge once to sneak across my property uninvited in order to climb over another the back fence of and link up with another ISIS terrorist who turns out to be a co-conspirator, and the two of them commit an act of terrorism in which people are killed. I no longer own my drawbridge.....the government does? I'm not the terrorist. My terms of use (must be invited across...i.e. "licensed... for lawful purposes) of my drawbridge were clearly violated. I committed no crime. But since my drawbridge was used unlawfully by one terrorist to connect with another terrorist for the purpose of committing capital murder. ........I no longer own my drawbridge. Jefferson is spinning in his grave. OK, the bridge thing has me spinning, i think I may be the terrorist now :mrgreen: Let's try this to bring it back to your favorite technology vendor Apple: Two hypotheticals - 1.0 Tim Cook is scared that ISIS will initiate reprisals upon Apple worldwide if he is seen to cooperate with the FBI and he is less scared of violating the court order. But he does have the technological solution. 2.0 Tim Cook has the technological solution and has already assisted the FBI in retrieving the data. This whole thing is a smokescreen designed to not let ISIS know that they are about to join the 72 virgins travel club (with a nod to Andy). Like it? I do. If you do, let's try to solve the mystery of Flight 370. http://i68.tinypic.com/t6p010.jpg...

As long as your drawbridge was not owned by the city you lived in and used during the committment of capital murder by terrorists who are NOT ISIS affiliated, you seem to have a clear cut infallible argument. They own the phone, which is the physical hardware - not the IOS software, that is licenced. Apple isn't trying to keep them from hacking the phone, they just aren't hacking it for the FBI (or building a special backdoor for "government use only"). The data belonging to the terrorist is the issue. The IOS is simply the application needed to access it. HAND OVER THE DATA :smash...

I don't think so. It is a matter of removing the technical ways that you can be legally compelled to give up the data. Apple built a bridge with a locked gate. In the past, the .gov wrote court orders to force Apple to unlock the gate so they could cross the bridge. Apple learned from that so they didn't build a better gate, they burned the bridge. So now they are writing a court order telling them to rebuild the bridge. Android, I think your explanation is excellent. Thank you for your post. :tiphat: Hands down, the best illustration yet. The issue boils down to whether or not you think that gov't should have the power to force you to rebuild what you've already destroyed - particularly if that consists of intellectual property. Can you be compelled to "remember" something you've not only forgotten, but have forgotten the method you used to create it in the first place? Well, sort of....... A judge can hold you in contempt and jail you until you remember, but if you've literally forgotten, nothing can make you remember what is no longer in your brain. If Apple destroyed all code and documentation for a previous bridge, it is not as simple as holding them in contempt until they provide what gov't wants. Because of the many changes in Apple iOS over the years, they wouldn't be compelled to RE-create something they once had ; they would be compelled to create something entirely new. iOS is Apple's property, and its users are granted a license to use it. Let's say I build a moat halfway down my driveway, WELL onto my property and off the public highway, and I also install a draw bridge across the moat which can be lowered whenever I grant a visitor a license to access to the rest of my property. By definition, that drawbridge is also well onto my property and off the public highway. Sometime later I decide that it was not only a mistake to make that access possible by drawbridge, but also my moat is too narrow and shallow. So I tear down the drawbridge and burn both the wood I made it out of and the plans I built it from, and I dig my moat even deeper and make it wider. Then one day the FBI comes along and says, "lower the drawbridge". My truthful answer is, "I cannot, I don't have one anymore". So the FBI says, "rebuild the drawbridge you once had". My truthful answer is, I no longer have the wood, I no longer have the plans, and even if I did, that drawbridge would not cross this moat!" So the FBI answers, "we want you to build a road-going mobile drawbridge which will not only span your moat, but then we can use it to defeat the moats of other private citizens". I respectfully tell the FBI to pound sand.....build it themselves. That is a more detailed explanation. As long as your drawbridge was not owned by the city you lived in and used during the committment of capital murder by terrorists who are NOT ISIS affiliated, you seem to have a clear cut infallible argument...

So, which non-Apple, non-Android, non-Windows products will you be ordering for work? http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51dcfWjZB0L._AC_UL320_SR218,320_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VpW3Q7kxL._SY300_.jpg :rolll PERFECT!!!!! :cheers2: For manufacturing drawings I will resurect the blueprint room as well. I love the smell of ammonia in the morning, it smells like victory...

http://www.macworld.com/article/3034355/ios/why-the-fbis-request-to-apple-will-affect-civil-rights-for-a-generation.html Nice! MacWorld . Was there nothing in the New York Times? :nono...

Apple has unlocked phones 70 times before says the feds. Apple does not dispute the figures. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/17/apple-unlocked-iphones-for-the-feds-70-times-before.html But what model and version of os? Older versions did not have the same security settings on by default . A phone with an older os may very likely be quite easy to get into The article has a quote that Apple can unlock it and won't, which if true is where I disagree with them since they have a federal court order and the govt followed all required legal requirements ...but it still seems to be a lot of hearsay from both sides What difference does which version of operating system does it make? They caved 70 times. Flexible ethics. The hallmark of progressivism. YUP! :thumbs2: Or as made famous during the Clinton years,"Situational Ethics". Profit motive pure and simple for Apple. They have unlocked many phones before and the FBI is NOT asking for all phones, just this one. For Apple's Cook, there is obviously no absolute standard against which all things should be measured. But then again, why should we expect him to actually adhere to any moral standards? There is clearly NO "Do the right thing" moral obligation extant at Apple. Which is why I will never patronize them! Which means you will not be patronizing Google or Microsoft either. They're standing behind Apple on this one. http://www.cultofmac.com/413014/companies-line-up-to-support-apples-pro-privacy-stance/ Good point, thanks. I was running out of companies to trash :grumbl...

Apple has unlocked phones 70 times before says the feds. Apple does not dispute the figures. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/17/apple-unlocked-iphones-for-the-feds-70-times-before.html But what model and version of os? Older versions did not have the same security settings on by default . A phone with an older os may very likely be quite easy to get into The article has a quote that Apple can unlock it and won't, which if true is where I disagree with them since they have a federal court order and the govt followed all required legal requirements ...but it still seems to be a lot of hearsay from both sides What difference does which version of operating system does it make? They caved 70 times. Flexible ethics. The hallmark of progressivism. YUP! :thumbs2: Or as made famous during the Clinton years,"Situational Ethics". Profit motive pure and simple for Apple. They have unlocked many phones before and the FBI is NOT asking for all phones, just this one. For Apple's Cook, there is obviously no absolute standard against which all things should be measured. But then again, why should we expect him to actually adhere to any moral standards? There is clearly NO "Do the right thing" moral obligation extant at Apple. Which is why I will never patronize them...

It's funny to see all the "experts" who say Apple can defeat the encryptions they employed for the newest iOS in an afternoon. Morons all. Hopefully Apple will fight this all the way to the SCOTUS, so it won't even be addressed this year, leaving the FBI to wonder if there's anything but game scores on the one iPhone the BGs didn't destroyl. Probably nothing there anyway. :boxing Are you actually Wendy Davis? :waiting...

WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to . Because, at least according to Apple's claims, there isn't a mechanism for them to open any phone, regardless of what the warrant says. Assuming they're telling the truth, it's not a matter of willingness — it is literally impossible for them to comply. Regarding a hypothetical "custom" iOS that doesn't enforce the policy that deletes the phone after 10 failed unlock attempts, it still might not be possible. If that functionality is done in hardware, it won't matter what the OS says because the OS wouldn't be what's doing the deletion. There is precedent for this... iPhones (and iPads) that support TouchID (and possibly the older ones as well... I'm not sure) have dedicated security hardware for verifying that nobody has tampered with the fingerprint scanner. If I were designing a security system, that's how I'd do it. Once you become convinced the device has been compromised, then you have to assume the OS might be as well, so the correct course of action is to do the wiping in hardware, specifically to prevent someone from carrying out the very kind of attack that the courts are ordering Apple to do. Plus, unless the phone is set to automatically install (not just download) OS updates without asking first, it won't matter because the iPhone in question won't load the new OS. Aples claims are nonsense. There is always a solution. The real problem is that there is likely no will to implement it at Apple...

Umm... this is EXACTLY why I will not own anything but Apple products. Not only will they not allow the government to search your stuff without a warrant, they will not allow the government to search your stuff WITH a warrant and a judge's order. There are those who believe that "We must give up some liberty for security" . I, however, do not. What do you think that is on that phone that will help fight terrorism? Any call, text, email, tweet, facebook post, Etc that was sent or received by that phone has already been captured by the NSA. The only possible thing that could be on there is a contacts list with phone numbers or email addresses of known ISIS folks... but the case is still there that anything sent or received has already been captured by the NSA, so even that won't really help unless they had such a contact, but never actually sent anything to it. And what are the chances of that? NSA only captures meta-data. Not content. Am 100% with you as regards NOT ever trading liberty for security. Just sayin the way I was trained, if the Govt wants that terrorist's phone information, ALL OF IT, then I would not rest until I provided it. Anything to help catch, convict, and if possible kill another terrorist - that is where I make my stand...

Bitter, I have to respectfully disagree..... I'm on my 3rd iPhone. I appreciate the privacy from the overreaching grasp of an out of control federal gov't which, particularly under the direction of a racist fascist like Obama, thinks it has no limits to its power over our lives. If that means that Apple has exclusive use of my data so that they can try to sell me stuff, well at least I'm being marketed to by a company which cares more about my 4th Amendment rights than does the government which is charged with protecting those rights. If it is possible for Apple to cooperate with that investigation without revealing their encryption methods to gov't, then maybe they should cooperate. But if cooperation means revealing their encryption methods, thereby unlocking all iPhones to gov't intrusion at will, then the Obama administration can go fly a kite........EVEN if that means that some connection to other terrorists goes undiscovered. "You'll be safer" as an excuse for giving NSA unprecedented access in all of history to the private data of loyal American citizens has turned out NOT to have prevented jihadist attacks in this country. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security and passage of the "Patriot" Act has made us LESS secure in our persons and affairs, while adding a HUGE bureaucracy with vast powers onto the backs of already overburdened taxpayers - a bureaucracy, which once created, will NEVER disappear from that burden. The last time I boarded a plane, I had to submit to having my privates jostled by a woman in uniform with an attitude. If Apple can and will protect this lowly consumer's privacy from the intrusions of such a gov't, I applaud and thank them. Just look at what the pursuit of terrorism has done to both our liberties and our presumption of innocence even without criminal charges. We now live in an ages where we have to PROVE to gov't that our continued personal liberty is merited every single day by submitting to daily ongoing invasions of our privacy. Is THAT what generations of Americans fought and died for? Those terrorists are dead. Good. Some of their associations have already been discovered. Good. I seriously doubt that giving THIS gov't access to the data of ALL Apple users will catch a single terrorist....... But it WILL diminish the Constitution that much more. TRUE Liberty is not without risk. I would rather assume that risk than surrender my Liberty. If others are more concerned about their risk than their liberty, then let them take steps individually to mitigate their risks (by carrying a gun, for instance). But the argument that ALL must surrender their liberty so that SOME can feel safe is bovine waste product, and it has done more to damage liberty in this country than almost any other influence. While I heartly agree with the majority of your points, I think that your argument is as well formed as it is misplaced. WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to . Apple doesn't give a dang about our rights, they are about as far left wing a company in philosophy as exists. They are doing this for commercial gain, likely due to the well deserved perception that their products are in fact NOT secure. And while I am all for privacy and probably quite libertarian in that regard (shoot, I am still a Blackberry user), let's not get all crazy here. I have been finger printed, subject to multiple FBI background checks, regular lie detector screenings (try keeping a straight face when some kid just out of college asks if you have ever lied to your wife or a co-worker!) all for work, and so far, I am still here unscathed, posting my opinions. So, we can agree to disagree on the integrity of Apple, but as for the rest, you are the closest thing to mom and apple pie for me! :coolgleamA...

Apple will fight a federal magistrate's order to help the Obama administration break into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the shooters in last December's deadly San Bernardino terror attack. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/17/apple-to-fight-order-to-help-hack-san-bernardino-shooters-phone.html?intcmp=hpbt1 As someone else famously said, "common sense is not so common".....