4 ms·

> Should we put in place ubiquitous video and audio surveillance in every square foot of the country just in case the FBI ever wants to review something that ha

> Should we put in place ubiquitous video and audio surveillance in every square foot of the country just in case the FBI ever wants to review something that happened? In public areas that are often visited? Absolutely yes, an unbiased source of evidence available to the public? Excellent. > Law enforcement has apparently lost the ability to do on the ground investigation work in favor of whiz bang-ery Apple has provided a child porn trading network protected by the very principles of mathematics and their refusal to cooperate with the FBI. What they're doing is precisely what any law enforcement agency would.

sitharus 11y ago
Can we not drag this down to the media scare tactic that is child pornography? For every sicko who's trading child porn there's dozens, if not hundreds, more who're trying to escape an abusive partner, leaving gangs, getting away from sexual slavery, or whistleblowing on government or companies breaching the law. Additionally, should the millions of us engaged in perfectly legitimate activities have a dossier created on our lives just in case? Imagine what could happen to that information, you could be facing secret blacklists like the UK. If Apple create this ability its use will extend past the immediate issue and affect people who genuinely need this security. In the digital world, as Apple said, you cannot destroy something or lock it away once it's used.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  > Can we not drag this down to the media scare tactic that is child pornography? You mean can we not use the crime Apple has essentially made impossible to secure a conviction on? No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters. > For every sicko who's trading child porn there's dozens, if not hundreds, more who're trying to escape an abusive partner, leaving gangs, getting away from sexual slavery, or whistleblowing on government or companies breaching the law. None of which is remotely related to phones being unbreakable by law enforcement. > If Apple create this ability its use will extend past the immediate issue and affect people who genuinely need this security A fallacious slippery slope. If you let the Police search my house, they will search everyone's house without a warrant and therefore it's bad to have any searching ever.
  - macintux 11y ago
    "Won't someone think of the children" is a battle cry used almost exclusively to subvert our liberties.
  - braythwayt 11y ago
    > No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters. And I'm sorry, no it doesn't matter to this argument. Civil liberties are civil liberties, whether we are talking about investigating the theft of a stick of chewing gum, the theft of millions of dollars, a slap in the face, the breaking of an arm, the rape of a child, or the murder to thousands of civilians by terrorists. Bringing up the most horrible of crimes to justify a particular argument for increasing the powers of law enforcement is an obvious attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than to experience. If your argument is any good, it will be just as good when talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of tax evasion as it is for talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of child rape and terrorism. Otherwise, we go to a place where we say, "Well, the shouldn't summarily execute people who steal cigars from convenience stores, but when it comes to terrorists, we shouldn't let laws get in the way of their need to do what's expedient."
    - hahainternet 11y ago
      > Brining up the most horrible of crimes to justify a particular argument for increasing the powers of law enforcement is an obvious attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than to experience. No it's actually an appeal to both. The increase in powers here if any exists whatsoever is minimal. I'm advocating Apple comply with them. > If your argument is any good, it will be just as good when talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of tax evasion as it is for talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of child rape and terrorism. If they can search your home for it, they should be permitted to search your phone for it. Both should have the exact same expectation of privacy and the exact same judicial oversight. > Otherwise, we go to a place where we say, "Well, the shouldn't summarily execute people who steal cigars from convenience stores, but when it comes to terrorists, we shouldn't let laws get in the way of their need to do what's expedient." There is no evidence that there is any legal protection for Apple here and strong evidence that indeed the FBI can compel them. Nobody is advocating breaking the law or even going around it.
dang 11y ago
Please stop taking HN discussions into generic flamewars. A comment like "No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11153295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11153295) is an internet reductio ad absurdum. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11152327 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11152327 and marked it off-topic.

sitharus 11y ago

Can we not drag this down to the media scare tactic that is child pornography? For every sicko who's trading child porn there's dozens, if not hundreds, more who're trying to escape an abusive partner, leaving gangs, getting away from sexual slavery, or whistleblowing on government or companies breaching the law. Additionally, should the millions of us engaged in perfectly legitimate activities have a dossier created on our lives just in case? Imagine what could happen to that information, you could be facing secret blacklists like the UK. If Apple create this ability its use will extend past the immediate issue and affect people who genuinely need this security. In the digital world, as Apple said, you cannot destroy something or lock it away once it's used.

hahainternet 11y ago
> Can we not drag this down to the media scare tactic that is child pornography? You mean can we not use the crime Apple has essentially made impossible to secure a conviction on? No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters. > For every sicko who's trading child porn there's dozens, if not hundreds, more who're trying to escape an abusive partner, leaving gangs, getting away from sexual slavery, or whistleblowing on government or companies breaching the law. None of which is remotely related to phones being unbreakable by law enforcement. > If Apple create this ability its use will extend past the immediate issue and affect people who genuinely need this security A fallacious slippery slope. If you let the Police search my house, they will search everyone's house without a warrant and therefore it's bad to have any searching ever.
- macintux 11y ago
  "Won't someone think of the children" is a battle cry used almost exclusively to subvert our liberties.
- braythwayt 11y ago
  > No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters. And I'm sorry, no it doesn't matter to this argument. Civil liberties are civil liberties, whether we are talking about investigating the theft of a stick of chewing gum, the theft of millions of dollars, a slap in the face, the breaking of an arm, the rape of a child, or the murder to thousands of civilians by terrorists. Bringing up the most horrible of crimes to justify a particular argument for increasing the powers of law enforcement is an obvious attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than to experience. If your argument is any good, it will be just as good when talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of tax evasion as it is for talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of child rape and terrorism. Otherwise, we go to a place where we say, "Well, the shouldn't summarily execute people who steal cigars from convenience stores, but when it comes to terrorists, we shouldn't let laws get in the way of their need to do what's expedient."
  - hahainternet 11y ago
    > Brining up the most horrible of crimes to justify a particular argument for increasing the powers of law enforcement is an obvious attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than to experience. No it's actually an appeal to both. The increase in powers here if any exists whatsoever is minimal. I'm advocating Apple comply with them. > If your argument is any good, it will be just as good when talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of tax evasion as it is for talking about why the police should be able to search your phone for evidence of child rape and terrorism. If they can search your home for it, they should be permitted to search your phone for it. Both should have the exact same expectation of privacy and the exact same judicial oversight. > Otherwise, we go to a place where we say, "Well, the shouldn't summarily execute people who steal cigars from convenience stores, but when it comes to terrorists, we shouldn't let laws get in the way of their need to do what's expedient." There is no evidence that there is any legal protection for Apple here and strong evidence that indeed the FBI can compel them. Nobody is advocating breaking the law or even going around it.

dang 11y ago

Please stop taking HN discussions into generic flamewars. A comment like "No, I'm sorry. Kids being raped matters" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11153295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11153295) is an internet reductio ad absurdum. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11152327 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11152327 and marked it off-topic.