Hi Scott, I agree 1776 was a great year! This discussion wouldn't be taking place if we had "locked down" the borders and through out all the illegals in the USA! Thats correct I & the majority of the heartland of the USA are not politically correct and we dig it! I'd rather be "biblically Correct" than politically correct any day! Thank GOD for the second amendment! :) HTH
Chuck CHUCK REICHEL soundpicturerecord...@gmail.com www.SoundPictureRecording.com 954-742-0019 Isaiah 26 : 3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee. In GOD I Trust On Feb 22, 2016, at 11:32 AM, Scott Granados wrote: > Just one thing that to me puts a whole in your argument all though really > well made by the way. > > The FBI actually reset the phone while in it’s possession. So it’s come out > in the US news, KGO radio specifically as part of their local coverage is > reporting that the FBI hard reset the phone while in their possession and > Apple is now being asked to reconstruct that data as well ad decrypt anything > etc. > > Personally this just indicates what I’ve always believed, FBI stands for Fat, > Bald and Ignorant. These are bulls in a china closet trying to scare us in > to submission. > > You make strong points and I whole heartedly support your cries for strong, > real cryptography under nobody’s control but I also have to cry out against a > bumbling government that doesn’t respect the for the people and by the people > phrase and rather treats us as subjects. That might work for you queen > lovers across the pond:) but not so much here. Something about a small > skirmish back in 1776 or so. > > I just get very nervous when the government asks for anything, especially to > circumvent security whether it’s good security or not. > > As always though, well presented and thank you for the thought provoker. > > I like both sides on this. I’m encouraged so many support protection of the > 4th amendment but I also welcome the chance to discuss with someone who feels > the opposite. > > Thank you > > >> On Feb 22, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Sabahattin Gucukoglu <listse...@me.com> wrote: >> >> OK, so I think it’s safe to come out of the woodwork and say what I think, >> even if it rocks the boat a bit and ruins a good love-in. >> >> I should qualify first by saying that I’m not American and therefore don’t >> enjoy the benefits of whatever “Precedent” is set by this case. Nor do I >> believe that the U.S. sovereignty is indicative of any real trend; at best >> it is a matter for western “Democracies”, and I daresay you can guess how I >> feel about those. I don’t even believe the U.S. is safe, given what we now >> know is possible, following the revelation of the specifics. >> >> This article, by a Canadian, captures my feelings very well: >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/17/why_tim_cook_is_wrong_a_privacy_advocates_view/ >> >> In summary, I agree with the judge. I believe this was a PR campaign >> intended to attract public support for Apple’s business practices, >> regardless of Cook’s genuine ethical alignment on the issue. I believe >> Apple would have acceded to the demands, had they been filed under seal, as >> Apple had initially requested, and that Apple’s plea was necessary as a >> response to the FBI’s refusal. I think this firmware hack qualifies as >> legal assistance—particularly horrible legal assistance, but assistance >> nevertheless, made more than possible by the ineffectual security of these >> devices—and that the case for proper security far exceeds any question of >> legal precedent, particularly when the search was legitimate and would >> otherwise have been authorised without Apple’s assistance. Clearly, the >> fact that the judiciary can ask for the data is the vulnerability here, and >> not that they can compel a manufacturer to exploit a weakness in their >> products. >> >> Therefore, the only defence is cryptography; anything less is mere security >> by obscurity. We must have cryptography that works, is provable and is >> verifiable. The iPhone does not provide this: Apple maintains the key for >> the software upgrade process, and that process exposes the weakness of the >> cryptography now in use to any person in possession of it, including but not >> limited to the U.S. judiciary courtesy of Apple itself. Between Apple’s >> hubris and the need for user convenience, Apple is using the court to defend >> the indefensible, and are fighting entirely the wrong fight. We need >> cryptography, under our control, and without the threat of trivial >> circumvention. Until this changes, Apple’s appeal to the court and the >> public is naive at best and disingenuous at worst. >> >> So Apple should accede to the FBI, as ordered. It’s the best thing that >> privacy advocates could hope for. Next time, Apple will have got it right, >> and their responses to requests for legal assistance will be much shorter. >> >> There! Don’t you feel much better now? :) >> >> -- >> The following information is important for all members of the Mac >> Visionaries list. >> >> If you have any questions or concerns about the running of this list, or if >> you feel that a member's post is inappropriate, please contact the owners or >> moderators directly rather than posting on the list itself. >> >> Your Mac Visionaries list moderator is Mark Taylor and your owner is Cara >> Quinn - you can reach Cara at caraqu...@caraquinn.com >> >> The archives for this list can be searched at: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/macvisionaries@googlegroups.com/ >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > The following information is important for all members of the Mac Visionaries > list. > > If you have any questions or concerns about the running of this list, or if > you feel that a member's post is inappropriate, please contact the owners or > moderators directly rather than posting on the list itself. > > Your Mac Visionaries list moderator is Mark Taylor and your owner is Cara > Quinn - you can reach Cara at caraqu...@caraquinn.com > > The archives for this list can be searched at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/macvisionaries@googlegroups.com/ > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- The following information is important for all members of the Mac Visionaries list. If you have any questions or concerns about the running of this list, or if you feel that a member's post is inappropriate, please contact the owners or moderators directly rather than posting on the list itself. Your Mac Visionaries list moderator is Mark Taylor and your owner is Cara Quinn - you can reach Cara at caraqu...@caraquinn.com The archives for this list can be searched at: http://www.mail-archive.com/macvisionaries@googlegroups.com/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
