Yeah, that's just math.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
[email protected]

> On Feb 20, 2016, at 1:08 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Terrible at reward assessment also.
>  
> We buy lottery tickets, but won’t contribute to a 401K with 100% company 
> match.
>  
>  
> From: Adam Moffett
> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2016 11:50 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Apple
>  
> Yeah it's a real psychological phenomenon.  We (humans) are terrible at 
> intuitive risk assessment.
> We're worried about terrorist attacks, but not worried about our cholesterol 
> and driving habits which are both more dangerous.
> 
> I don't see a conspiracy underneath it all though.  I just see us flailing 
> around stupidly like the dumb mammals we really are.
> 
> 
>> On 2/20/2016 12:12 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>> Too bad we don't give as much attention, publicity, and funding to prevent 
>> ways that people actually die.
>>  
>> http://m.livescience.com/3780-odds-dying.html
>>  
>> Way more likely to die from heart disease, cancer or a car accident.  
>> Terrorist attack didn't even register on their list, it's lumped in with 
>> "all other"
>>  
>> If we could only improve car safety a little bit we would instantly save 
>> more lives then all terrorist attacks on US soil ever! 
>>  
>> But it's way more exciting for our government to rule by fear :-/
>>  
>> -Sean 
>> 
>>> On Friday, February 19, 2016, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The flip side of this coin is the FBI trying this in the court of public 
>>> opinion.
>>> 
>>> I say it's a publicity stunt by the FBI.
>>> 
>>> Fear Fear Fear. 
>>> 
>>> That's what they're selling these days, and I haven't been buying tehy 
>>> b**sh*t since 9/11.
>>> 
>>> bp
>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>> 
>>>> On 2/19/2016 6:58 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>>>> True, getting it decided in the courts is the best outcome.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm still not convinced that this is anything more than a publicity stunt 
>>>> on Apples side. If Apple has the ability to create a way to unlock it, and 
>>>> they haven't said that they can't do it, how is that any different from 
>>>> them already having it? And why is it any better for Apple to have the 
>>>> ability to crack iPhones than the FBI? Now, I certainly don't trust the 
>>>> government, but they've pretty much always had the ability to look at 
>>>> anything and everything we have in this sort of an investigation. 
>>>> 
>>>> This is basically the equivalent of the FBI finding a safe with a built in 
>>>> safe that has a built in self destruct feature and telling the company 
>>>> that built it to disable the self destruct, so they can try cracking it... 
>>>> they aren't asking them to put a camera in every        safe they build so 
>>>> that they can look inside whenever they want, which is what a lot of 
>>>> people seem to be making this out to be.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Chuck Macenski <[email protected]> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> WIthout taking a public position one way or the other, this need to be 
>>>>> settled in the courts so that we all have some idea of what rights we do 
>>>>> or do not have; we should not be required to guess about what the 
>>>>> government can and can't do; if we can't be trusted to know what the 
>>>>> government can do, then it can be argued that we have no rights. I am 
>>>>> reminded of the national security letters which are arguably 
>>>>> unconstitutional, but, any attempt to present that argument to the 
>>>>> judicial branch can result in your imprisonment. 
>>>>>  
>>>>> my 2 cents
>>>>>  
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Brian Webster <[email protected]> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Ok I will bite to keep the thread moving.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ponder this thought:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Executive branch has the ability to direct the NSA to do domestic 
>>>>>> spying, may not be legal but they do it anyway. This includes spying on 
>>>>>> members of congress.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We know politicians all have skeletons in their closets, makes them ripe 
>>>>>> for extortion and such. Executive branch uses the NSA to gather all 
>>>>>> these bits of juicy data that incriminates ANY and ALL politicians.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Every time a critical vote in congress comes up, they study where the 
>>>>>> swing votes may be, then all you do in threaten to disclose any of these 
>>>>>> juicy details the NSA has gathered. End result is the vote goes the way 
>>>>>> you need it to.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As the executive branch you use this power and tactic very carefully and 
>>>>>> sparingly so as not to raise suspicions or to cause legislative revolt.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The public does not worry about this because they have the protection of 
>>>>>> the Supreme Court and the balance of powers.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Then you think, but what if the executive branch does this to the judges 
>>>>>> too…………………
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This level of power is something that once discovered would never be 
>>>>>> given up, it’s just too handy and powerful, no matter which party the 
>>>>>> executive may be from.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank You,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Brian Webster
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 9:03 PM
>>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Apple
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yeah, I was being a troll when I started the thread.  I knew it would 
>>>>>> get some traction.  Tushar was right, I was bored. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 7:01 PM
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To: Animal Farm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Apple
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hire a high school get to open phone.  Geezh
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 19, 2016 3:45 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Treason?
>>>>>> 
> 

Reply via email to