Comment by BluSyn
4 years ago
I understand the hesitation here, but fundamentally this is like trying to close pandoras box. If something is technically possible to do AND governments demand it be done, it will be done. If not by Apple, by someone else.
Rather than complain about it, I am interested in what alternative solutions exist, or how concerns regarding privacy and abuse of this system could be mitigated.
I don't understand this argument at all. Look at the Clipper Chip debacle in the 90s. It was technically feasible and the government very much wanted to do it. And the reason they didn't is push back from the public, saying this is a bad idea that can easily be misused, even if it does make some law enforcement things easier. I don't see how this is any different.
Sacrificing the privacy of the many to help catch a relatively small amount of (admittedly some of the worst possible) criminals, while simultaneously enabling yet more effective surveillance and oppression by those inclined governments (of which there are plenty) is a pretty terrible idea.
Eliminating the 4th amendment or mandating clear walls sure would make the cops' job easier. But no one thinks that's even a remotely good idea.
> Eliminating the 4th amendment or mandating clear walls sure would make the cops' job easier. But no one thinks that's even a remotely good idea.
Yet.
Frighteningly, there really are people who think that's a good idea. The "If you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide" crowd. And the cops.
This argument falls on it's head when confronted by reality. Either you have a trustworthy government already that will respect your rights in a slow-rolling fashion that shifts as the dialogue within the courts evolves or you already have a government that doesn't care about you and your laws/desires at all and which will do what it wants anyway. Unless you're in the ladder there's no reason to be so hostile to empowering technologies, especially when they're being used to fight some of the most heinous types of crime.
Power corrupts.
2 replies →
No, we can complain about it, and we can win. Remember when the government tried to ban encryption in early 1990s?
Remember SOPA that the internet killed?
And the Clipper chip!
>what alternative solutions exist,
stop trading freedom for security.
This is too vague. We need something concrete.
Apple beat government spying in the past so I don't see why they can't again.
It’s not trying to close Pandora’s box. It’s liability limitation. They’re effectively saying that if you want to distribute CP don’t do it on an iPhone.
They're basically saying, that they're watching all your multimedia, to see if maybe you're distributing child porn. This is like doing rectal exams on everyone, every day, because someone might be hiding drugs there.