3 ms·
> "My conclusion so far is that you cannot take an absolutist view on this," he said. "So if your bargain is strong encryption, no matter what, that we can and
by fweespee_ch 11y ago
> "My conclusion so far is that you cannot take an absolutist view on this," he said. "So if your bargain is strong encryption, no matter what, that we can and should in fact create 'black boxes,' then that I think does not strike the kind of balance that we have lived with for 200, 300 years, and it's fetishizing our phones above every other value. And that can't be the right answer."
http://www.wired.com/2012/11/ff-the-manuscript/ http://www.wired.com/2012/11/ff-the-manuscript/
> For more than 260 years, the contents of that page—and the details of this ritual—remained a secret. They were hidden in a coded manuscript, one of thousands produced by secret societies in the 18th and 19th centuries. At the peak of their power, these clandestine organizations, most notably the Freemasons, had hundreds of thousands of adherents, from colonial New York to imperial St. Petersburg. Dismissed today as fodder for conspiracy theorists and History Channel specials, they once served an important purpose: Their lodges were safe houses where freethinkers could explore everything from the laws of physics to the rights of man to the nature of God, all hidden from the oppressive, authoritarian eyes of church and state. But largely because they were so secretive, little is known about most of these organizations. Membership in all but the biggest died out over a century ago, and many of their encrypted texts have remained uncracked, dismissed by historians as impenetrable novelties.
Obama's claim should not be taken as anything other than a blatant lie he knows the majority of people are too ignorant to notice.
- fixermark 11y agoYou seem to be making the bad-faith assumption that Obama is familiar enough with the history of strong encryption or Freemasonry that he'd know about the situation you describe. Don't ascribe to malice, etc. (though of course when talking of the leader of a superpower, the ill effects of malice and ignorance may be indistinguishable enough to render the difference meaningless).
- fweespee_ch 11y ago> (though of course when talking of the leader of a superpower, the ill effects of malice and ignorance may be indistinguishable enough to render the difference meaningless). I was going to argue you with you until you added this. ;) Malice and ignorance for someone in his position are identical in my world view. The man has a budget to hire the most intelligent people in the country to advise him. Ignorance and/or incompetence in public interviews should be beyond the realm of a reasonable result. That said, I realize not everyone feels that way.