4 ms·

I agree with you, and I think this will eventually lead to a world where governments are unable to exert meaningful influence on large corporations. We're alrea

by exelius 11y ago

I agree with you, and I think this will eventually lead to a world where governments are unable to exert meaningful influence on large corporations. We're already starting to get there; I have a feeling that if the supreme court had forced Apple to write a custom version of iOS that things could have gotten really messy very quickly -- there were rumors that Apple's entire iOS engineering team was ready to resign if the case went the wrong way. It's plausible to see a scenario where Apple says "You know what? Fuck it, we're based in Ireland now." Ultimately, I don't think governments are designed to deal with corporations that make as much money as a company like Apple does. These companies are the size of governments -- if Apple decided it wanted to hire a bunch of mercenaries and take over a small country, it could probably do so (if it didn't mind getting embargoed by whoever was friendly to the country they took over). I wouldn't be surprised to see corporate sovereignty become a big international issue in our lifetimes. International law is a huge grey area, and I expect companies to exploit that to their advantage to avoid enforcement actions by individual nations.

studentrob 11y ago
> It's plausible to see a scenario where Apple says "You know what? Fuck it, we're based in Ireland now." Maybe, but I think you're putting the cart before the horse. We're not at that stage right now. Right now we can turn the tables on the FBI and demand they contribute back to our own ability to secure ourselves. It's not too tough to describe the issue to the general public. The FBI would ordinarily help businesses identify security vulnerabilities in their products, such as a flaw in a bank vault, because it makes the public more safe to enable the bank to secure itself. Law enforcement regularly recommends certain bike locks, car systems (note their recent notification about remote exploits [1]), etc. over others. In this case, due to disagreement about how to keep the public safe, the FBI is refusing to cooperate with the general public who own iPhones. [1] http://www.ic3.gov/media/2016/160317.aspx http://www.ic3.gov/media/2016/160317.aspx
- exelius 11y ago
  > the FBI is refusing to cooperate with the general public who own iPhones. Which I think is a perfectly rational thing for the FBI to do in the absence of a law stating that they must do so. I don't think it's the best thing for democracy, but if I were a senior-level FBI official, I'm trying to give my organization as many tools as I can get to do their job. He's a man with a small, narrowly defined scope: investigate crimes as effectively as possible. It's not his job to think of the repurcussions. Which is why our current decade-long legislative deadlock is fucking killing us. The world today is nearly unrecognizable from the one in 2006 - and in the lack of leadership by Congress, the executive branch (which includes the FBI and most other non-military law enforcement agencies) has to step in and take control. Really, the problem is that a lack of leadership from congress has created a power vacuum that Obama has been publicly very reluctant to fill. But the gap exists, and people in the executive branch under Obama have had no such qualms expanding their power into areas that Congress just hasn't addressed because they're too buy trying to defund Obamacare or ban abortions. Our legislative process at work, folks.
  - studentrob 11y ago
    The people are the most powerful part of the legislative process in a democracy. They, and you, may have forgotten that by not voting and attempting to justify the positions taken by public officials who are sworn to protect the constitution. > Which I think is a perfectly rational thing for the FBI to do in the absence of a law stating that they must do so. I don't think it's the best thing for democracy, but... I've seen a lot of this "understanding" in the news and online. It is not how democracy works. We have the power, not them. We can literally vote them out of their jobs.
massysett 11y ago
> These companies are the size of governments -- if Apple decided it wanted to hire a bunch of mercenaries and take over a small country, it could probably do so Is this anything new though? I once heard the Dutch West India Company described as "Exxon Mobil with guns."
nsns 11y ago
I.e. new mutations of an older modern phenomena - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company
wyldfire 11y ago
> Fuck it, we're based in Ireland now Apple has an enormous investment in their design team in Cupertino. It would be an enormous impact to their product development capability to start over somewhere else. It's not enough to say "HQ is over here bro," court orders still work in California. Then again this whole All Writs effort to "build me a tool to help my investigation" seems to break new ground. Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies).
- Caprinicus 11y ago
  I imagine most of the engineers would respond well to "can you please relocate closer to the giant pile of money in ireland"
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  "Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies)." That'd be an interesting possibility. Government, to U.S. consumers: "YOU are not allowed to buy the products you chose, because a foreign company refused to perform work for the U.S. Government." ...
- studentrob 11y ago
  > Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies). There are already state level bills proposing this in CA and NY [1]. Those bills would fine manufacturers $2,500 for every phone sold in those states that isn't capable of providing decrypted data. The language originally comes from a white paper by Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance. Feinstein-Burr are working on a similar federal bill which was supposed to be released late last year, then this month [2]. It has obviously been delayed by the public's response to the SB Apple case. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160122/06200833403/california-legislator-says-encryption-threatens-our-freedoms-calls-ban-encrypted-cell-phones.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160122/06200833403/calif... [2] http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-cybersecurity/2016/02/march-is-encryption-bill-month-hackers-going-after-japans-infrastructure-a-mixed-final-2015-tally-212865 http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-cybersecurity/2016...

by exelius 11y ago

studentrob 11y ago

> It's plausible to see a scenario where Apple says "You know what? Fuck it, we're based in Ireland now." Maybe, but I think you're putting the cart before the horse. We're not at that stage right now. Right now we can turn the tables on the FBI and demand they contribute back to our own ability to secure ourselves. It's not too tough to describe the issue to the general public. The FBI would ordinarily help businesses identify security vulnerabilities in their products, such as a flaw in a bank vault, because it makes the public more safe to enable the bank to secure itself. Law enforcement regularly recommends certain bike locks, car systems (note their recent notification about remote exploits [1]), etc. over others. In this case, due to disagreement about how to keep the public safe, the FBI is refusing to cooperate with the general public who own iPhones. [1] http://www.ic3.gov/media/2016/160317.aspx http://www.ic3.gov/media/2016/160317.aspx

exelius 11y ago
> the FBI is refusing to cooperate with the general public who own iPhones. Which I think is a perfectly rational thing for the FBI to do in the absence of a law stating that they must do so. I don't think it's the best thing for democracy, but if I were a senior-level FBI official, I'm trying to give my organization as many tools as I can get to do their job. He's a man with a small, narrowly defined scope: investigate crimes as effectively as possible. It's not his job to think of the repurcussions. Which is why our current decade-long legislative deadlock is fucking killing us. The world today is nearly unrecognizable from the one in 2006 - and in the lack of leadership by Congress, the executive branch (which includes the FBI and most other non-military law enforcement agencies) has to step in and take control. Really, the problem is that a lack of leadership from congress has created a power vacuum that Obama has been publicly very reluctant to fill. But the gap exists, and people in the executive branch under Obama have had no such qualms expanding their power into areas that Congress just hasn't addressed because they're too buy trying to defund Obamacare or ban abortions. Our legislative process at work, folks.
- studentrob 11y ago
  The people are the most powerful part of the legislative process in a democracy. They, and you, may have forgotten that by not voting and attempting to justify the positions taken by public officials who are sworn to protect the constitution. > Which I think is a perfectly rational thing for the FBI to do in the absence of a law stating that they must do so. I don't think it's the best thing for democracy, but... I've seen a lot of this "understanding" in the news and online. It is not how democracy works. We have the power, not them. We can literally vote them out of their jobs.

massysett 11y ago

> These companies are the size of governments -- if Apple decided it wanted to hire a bunch of mercenaries and take over a small country, it could probably do so Is this anything new though? I once heard the Dutch West India Company described as "Exxon Mobil with guns."

nsns 11y ago

I.e. new mutations of an older modern phenomena - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company

wyldfire 11y ago

> Fuck it, we're based in Ireland now Apple has an enormous investment in their design team in Cupertino. It would be an enormous impact to their product development capability to start over somewhere else. It's not enough to say "HQ is over here bro," court orders still work in California. Then again this whole All Writs effort to "build me a tool to help my investigation" seems to break new ground. Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies).

Caprinicus 11y ago
I imagine most of the engineers would respond well to "can you please relocate closer to the giant pile of money in ireland"
FireBeyond 11y ago
"Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies)." That'd be an interesting possibility. Government, to U.S. consumers: "YOU are not allowed to buy the products you chose, because a foreign company refused to perform work for the U.S. Government." ...
studentrob 11y ago
> Maybe it wouldn't even be enough to pack up and move all R&D out of the US (e.g. injunction on US sales until the foreign Apple company complies). There are already state level bills proposing this in CA and NY [1]. Those bills would fine manufacturers $2,500 for every phone sold in those states that isn't capable of providing decrypted data. The language originally comes from a white paper by Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance. Feinstein-Burr are working on a similar federal bill which was supposed to be released late last year, then this month [2]. It has obviously been delayed by the public's response to the SB Apple case. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160122/06200833403/california-legislator-says-encryption-threatens-our-freedoms-calls-ban-encrypted-cell-phones.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160122/06200833403/calif... [2] http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-cybersecurity/2016/02/march-is-encryption-bill-month-hackers-going-after-japans-infrastructure-a-mixed-final-2015-tally-212865 http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-cybersecurity/2016...