The topic being "Apple vs. FBI".

Personally I don't see what 'going to the President' would solve in this type of case, since it basically involves "Does Apple have to do this under current law?", and having any President/Future Office-Holder say anything on this is (without Congress) the same as one of us saying something: an opinion.

---

We wouldn't have Apple without the government. KingPresident has said this, “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” (Implying government made that happen.)

Mister no name would apple be around if your government had not spent all that money on the Space program and Government Contracts I ask ???

Would Net Flicks be Net Flicks if a couple of guys had not worked out how to store vids and stream them if the Government had not spent all that money on the Space program at the start of the tech revolution ???

I think Barrack Obama is a very smart man he doesn't lie to himself and is a truly Honourable man that has done his best under trying times .

And people wonder why I dislike the right wing of politics No Humanity because of the lie's they tell them self's

---

KingPresident has said this, “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” (Implying government made that happen.)

And then there's context.

---

Back to Important Subjects...

Constitutional Protected Privacy vs. Terrorists.

Judicial Power vs. Private Corporations

If it was a different set of circumstances I would agree with what Apple is saying but I do find it hard to believe they can't unlock it already .

And there fore in this case , that can lead to others out there plotting to do more harm they should just unlock it .

Take there stance with a different case that's not a act of war when we are at war .

And I will march to support them but there are exceptions in special cases like this . If they where alive then I mite not support the cops but there not alive and there are no other ways to get the info .

---

See that the FBI says Apple is the only "person" who can write this software they want. Swore to that. But Mcafee says he will write it. Doesn't that put the lie to the government's request?!

---

Don't know how many of you have try'd to Jail break a Iphone but I would not believe Apple can't unlock the phone as someone that has played around Jail breaking and hacking Iphones Apple need to stop there crap give up the info the F.B.I need and then chose a different more defendable set of circumstances to say what they are saying

And no I will not tell what I do know about Iphones and hacking them but lets say they are not as safe as they say they are .

---

Oh, I see you have a credit of more than 100 million.

When it comes to myself, the total credit here is about 7 million.

Is English the same language, or did you happen to learn to speak this way?

Presumably this is still Seti@home.

Oh, I see you have a credit of more than 100 million.

When it comes to myself, the total credit here is about 7 million.

Is English the same language, or did you happen to learn to speak this way?

Presumably this is still Seti@home.

No, this Einstein@. Close, but no cigar.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

Apple On FBI iPhone Request: 'The Founders Would Be Appalled'

Apple Corp. wrote:

"The government ... contends that because this Court issued a valid search warrant, it can order innocent third parties to provide any service the government deems 'necessary' or 'appropriate' to accomplish the search."

Both sides have acknowledged that the matter is ultimately a dispute over precedent: what should be the scope of government's power to compel the cooperation of an unwilling tech company to gain access to encrypted information.

---

Apple On FBI iPhone Request: 'The Founders Would Be Appalled'

Apple Corp. wrote:

"The government ... contends that because this Court issued a valid search warrant, it can order innocent third parties to provide any service the government deems 'necessary' or 'appropriate' to accomplish the search."

Both sides have acknowledged that the matter is ultimately a dispute over precedent: what should be the scope of government's power to compel the cooperation of an unwilling tech company to gain access to encrypted information.

U.S. Attorneys, in their latest court filing, argued that Apple has "overblown" security fears linked to the unlocking of the specific iPhone, using them as a "diversion" from what they describe as a very modest and targeted request. The Justice Department has the support of a number of law enforcement groups and relatives of San Bernardino shooting victims.

I would say the U.S. Attorneys are wrong there. Once the requested s/ware has been written, then they and others (China maybe) could ask to use it. And precedence would be on their side.

Apple On FBI iPhone Request: 'The Founders Would Be Appalled'

Apple Corp. wrote:

"The government ... contends that because this Court issued a valid search warrant, it can order innocent third parties to provide any service the government deems 'necessary' or 'appropriate' to accomplish the search."

Both sides have acknowledged that the matter is ultimately a dispute over precedent: what should be the scope of government's power to compel the cooperation of an unwilling tech company to gain access to encrypted information.

U.S. Attorneys, in their latest court filing, argued that Apple has "overblown" security fears linked to the unlocking of the specific iPhone, using them as a "diversion" from what they describe as a very modest and targeted request. The Justice Department has the support of a number of law enforcement groups and relatives of San Bernardino shooting victims.

I would say the U.S. Attorneys are wrong there. Once the requested s/ware has been written, then they and others (China maybe) could ask to use it. And precedence would be on their side.

The moment it exists other courts will instantly seize it. Copies will spread far and wide, despite court ordered seals. Every lawyer where there is an iphone in a case will demand it just to be sure evidence isn't being hidden. Its creation will result in iphones being worthless bricks. Next thing they will demand is custom software to be a keystroke logger installed on every iphone for whatever FISA order there is. Oh and while you are at it, send us the phone audio as well, turn on the microphone and the camera and send us that data as well.

---

They probably got all the information off the phone weeks ago but they dont want people to know they can do that . This is just a smoke screen to cover up the fact , are you so f-ing stupid to belive all you read , . Surely even a American would be able to work that out !!!

---

Life is what you make of it :-)

When i'm good i'm very good , but when i'm bad i'm shi#eloads better ;-) In't I " buttercups " p.m.s.l at authoritie !!;-)

The Equal Protection Clause in the constitution gives the federal government the authority to monitor everything you do on your iphone. The senate just needs to confirm the obama nominee to the SCOTUS so they can decide 5-4 that it's already in the constitution.

You all must want terrorist attacks, tax evaders and child pornographers.

No, but if you hadn't noticed technology has moved on.

There are already systems that only pass info encrypted, and even the makers of these systems cannot break into them, Threema.
Also look at Whatsapp. And what are blackberry doing these days, not long ago, and maybe still relevant, but you could have your account set up on the Mexican (and other places) servers which blocked access by the US authorities.

And do you want foreign powers demanding that Apple and the other companies allow them access to data that might not be in the US, or its citizen, interest.

Once you release the genie, it is released, no matter what the US courts or the FBI say.

And what if quantum entanglement becomes available, they're never going to break into comms links.

The Equal Protection Clause in the constitution gives the federal government the authority to monitor everything you do on your iphone. The senate just needs to confirm the obama nominee to the SCOTUS so they can decide 5-4 that it's already in the constitution.

You all must want terrorist attacks, tax evaders and child pornographers.

Why don't you have a stamp tax so that every tweet has to be approved by the government, making sure that these terrorists, the Grand Army of the Republic, are stopped before they do more harm. After all King George would never do anything to harm his beloved subjects.

---

Here or the Racism thread?
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/21/apple-fbi-black-americans-encryption-debate

When the FBI branded Martin Luther King Jr a “dangerous” threat to national security and began tapping his phones, it was part of a long history of spying on black activists in the United States. But the government surveillance of black bodies has never been limited to activists – in fact, according to the FBI; you only had to be black.

In the current fight between Apple and the FBI, black perspectives are largely invisible, yet black communities stand to lose big if the FBI wins. A federal judge in California is set to rule on Tuesday whether the FBI will be granted a request compelling Apple to unlock the iPhone of a San Bernardino shooter.

While seemingly about protecting national security – the same rationale used to justify 20th century surveillance of MLK, the Black Panther Party and others – this case is about much more. It could establish a legal precedent used to suppress the growing movement for black lives that is deposing public officials and disrupting the daily assault on black people in cities across the country.

Building off the civil rights and black power movements of the 1960s, a 21st century movement for black lives is coming of age, mobilizing the same courageous methods of non-violent direct action, using the same local-to-local strategy, and making many of the same demands. An intersectional approach is replacing old identity politics, and a newfound digital landscape is making communication possible in more directions and at previously unimaginable speeds. The movement for black lives is attracting the brightest minds and bravest bodies. Black activists are developing new ways of grassroots organizing in an information economy.

Like its predecessors, the democratic movement for black lives has been met by anti-democratic state surveillance and anti-black police violence. New “smart” policing methods are being used by modern-day gumshoes who, fueled by the false rhetoric of black criminality, experiment with high-tech tools to the detriment of black democratic engagement.

In the 20th century, the FBI admitted to overreaching and violating the constitution when it used its counter intelligence program, COINTELPRO, for domestic surveillance that spied on black activists. Last year, FBI director James Comey admitted in a congressional committee hearing to flying spy planes that monitored protests in the wake of police killings of black people in Ferguson and Baltimore with the agency working in tandem with local police. In Chicago, home of the infamous “red squad”, police collected “First Amendment Worksheets” on black organizations such as We Charge Genocide, and Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Push Coalition.

---

Here or the Racism thread?
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/21/apple-fbi-black-americans-encryption-debate

To me, that seems more about surveillance against certain groups, while the Apple case is more about how they're getting the information. Yes, having the ability to get into the phones the way the FBI wants would probably give a boost to their ability to do so, but (to me) it's like saying having a patrol car parked in certain areas boosts the ability to make arrests- it would be based on how it's applied, but they would have to get the equipment/ability first. And Apple doesn't want to "make the equipment".