3 ms·
The "different situation" you point out simply does not justify back doors. Having a purportedly valid use does nothing to cicumvent their undesirable nature an
by omniglottal 4y ago
The "different situation" you point out simply does not justify back doors. Having a purportedly valid use does nothing to cicumvent their undesirable nature and our need to eshew them entirely. This "difference" has no relevance over whether or not back doors should be tolerated in society because the reasons to have precisely none are so profound.
"They" invaded, you say? All the Russian iPhone users, was it? Is it true that zero Russian owners of iPhones were supportive of Ukraine and using their iPhones to organize and communicate anti-Putin protests? And Apple is the enforcer to whom the (US) public should appeal?
Yeah, that's a hard "nope".
- trasz 4y agoI agree about backdoors not being acceptable, but we are talking about using legitimate software update mechanisms, not backdoors. As for “not everyone is an active supporter” - governments exist to represent people. From this it naturally follows that the people should bear consequences of their governments’ actions. Its not the first Russian invasion, they had plenty of time to leave the country. Again - at this point, if something can destabilize Russia, then it’s a fair game from ethical point of view. It’s just lesser evil. But then of course there’s the strategic point of view. US approaching Russia in a surprisingly merciful and humane manner, and there are reasons for this.