4 ms·

It's really not far-fetched though. If you described the NSA's PRISM program before the Snowden leaks, you were branded a conspiracy theorist. If you claimed th

It's really not far-fetched though. If you described the NSA's PRISM program before the Snowden leaks, you were branded a conspiracy theorist. If you claimed the big tech cos were complacent in surveillance on American citizens (hell any citizen at this point) you were once again also stymied in some fashion. Waiting for it to become established fact to then condemn this Orwellian tech would ensure its implementation.

zepto 10y ago
Except that Apple wasn't complicit and has consistently worked to secure citizens against the US government. So your point is?
- WayneBro 10y ago
  Well, if we're going solely by Apple's behavior towards their customers, then I don't trust them one bit. That's kinda beside the point though because the very simple point here is: If the tech exists, it will be used. Obviously Apple is working against the vast majority of citizens by inventing this tech in the first place because the only use for it is to stop them from doing something that they obviously want to do.
  - zepto 10y ago
    > If the tech exists, it will be used. Well this is probably false. Most patented technologies are not used. In fact most of Apple's patented technologies are not used. You are flat out wrong. > the only use for it is to stop then doing something they obviously want to do This is also clearly wrong. The patent can be used to stop others from implementing this technology. Given that Apple has a celebrated track record of using technology to protect its users from intrusive governments, the likelyhood is that they would use this patent for that purpose.
- whamlastxmas 10y ago
  >worked to secure citizens against the US government It's probably more accurate to say they work to secure themselves against governments forcing NSLs down their throat. If Apple themselves cannot decrypt a phone, they can tell the FBI to go pound sand when they demand Apple drop everything to decrypt thousands of phones every month.
  - zepto 10y ago
    No it's not more accurate. Since other companies have gone down the route of providing streamlined law enforcement consoles, Apple's choice is clearly not one of convenience but of values.

zepto 10y ago

Except that Apple wasn't complicit and has consistently worked to secure citizens against the US government. So your point is?

WayneBro 10y ago
Well, if we're going solely by Apple's behavior towards their customers, then I don't trust them one bit. That's kinda beside the point though because the very simple point here is: If the tech exists, it will be used. Obviously Apple is working against the vast majority of citizens by inventing this tech in the first place because the only use for it is to stop them from doing something that they obviously want to do.
- zepto 10y ago
  > If the tech exists, it will be used. Well this is probably false. Most patented technologies are not used. In fact most of Apple's patented technologies are not used. You are flat out wrong. > the only use for it is to stop then doing something they obviously want to do This is also clearly wrong. The patent can be used to stop others from implementing this technology. Given that Apple has a celebrated track record of using technology to protect its users from intrusive governments, the likelyhood is that they would use this patent for that purpose.
whamlastxmas 10y ago
>worked to secure citizens against the US government It's probably more accurate to say they work to secure themselves against governments forcing NSLs down their throat. If Apple themselves cannot decrypt a phone, they can tell the FBI to go pound sand when they demand Apple drop everything to decrypt thousands of phones every month.
- zepto 10y ago
  No it's not more accurate. Since other companies have gone down the route of providing streamlined law enforcement consoles, Apple's choice is clearly not one of convenience but of values.