4 ms·

I think the point of The Intercept releasing this Apple specific info (mostly, there's a bit about Microsoft being targeted as well) is to try to appeal to the

I think the point of The Intercept releasing this Apple specific info (mostly, there's a bit about Microsoft being targeted as well) is to try to appeal to the large number of Apple customers. I'd love to see some of the other line items in the leaked CBJ document, as there are probably some other targeted attacks documented. Regarding Apple not capitulating, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that they're telling the truth, but wouldn't the NSL system mean that Tim Cook couldn't reveal if Apple had been forced to release data? I'm hoping that he has a personal warrant canary policy, and would just remain silent if asked about something he can't talk about.

a3n 12y ago
"No comment" from Cook would be an interesting standoff. If he were prosecuted for it, that would confirm something NSL-like. But would it be worth it to a CEO to go to jail for a few years for a principle?
- Intermernet 12y ago
  That of course, depends on the strength of said CEO's principles. This would be, of course, one of the hardest tests of professional principles you could imagine a CEO going through. I personally think Mr Cook would be a good candidate for passing this test, as he seems to have a track record for standing up for what he believes in. I also have a feeling that the US government would think twice before taking on the Apple PR juggernaut head to head. It would be too closely matched for comfort. Apple probably have greater mind-share than any of the political parties. As you say, it would be an interesting standoff!
  - jkestner 12y ago
    It's a little discomforting that we're hoping that corporations, presumably guided by a profit motive, will defend us against the government formed for the people (though more heavily influenced by other corporations). Even if Apple is trustworthy for a company, I'm not going to enjoy the future in which we pick our favorite companies to enact policy. Now, this is obviously happening to Google, et al, as well, so a joint action by the captains of industry — an appeal to the public more than the court — will be more effective.
    - mindcrime 12y ago
      Nothing wrong with "profit motive". Remember: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. ~~ Adam Smith That said, I'd personally like to see less power aggregated into the hands of both governments and big mega-corporations. But the big difference between the two, to my mind, is that governments have a near monopoly on "legitimate" use of force, and have lots of men with guns, tanks, bombers, nukes, etc. at their disposal. Corporations mostly lack those things, except to the extent that they collude with the governments.
      - jkestner 12y ago
        Yeah, I agree that profit motive is a motive I can work with. I guess libertarianism can be appealing when the government acts like a tumor. The government's monopoly on legitimate use of force is more relevant in less developed countries. Here, you can do more damage more easily by attacking computer-controlled infrastructure. (Imagine if the NRA was pointed at the real threat? Maybe they'd look a little like Anonymous.)
- fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
  There is a good chance that Cook, like anyone else is vulnerable to other charges; and in case he is a saint, they would just make something up. It won't be 'brave champion of freedom Tim Cook takes a principled stand and is persecuted by the NSA for it.' It would be either something like what happened to Joseph Naccio, or worse.

a3n 12y ago

"No comment" from Cook would be an interesting standoff. If he were prosecuted for it, that would confirm something NSL-like. But would it be worth it to a CEO to go to jail for a few years for a principle?

Intermernet 12y ago
That of course, depends on the strength of said CEO's principles. This would be, of course, one of the hardest tests of professional principles you could imagine a CEO going through. I personally think Mr Cook would be a good candidate for passing this test, as he seems to have a track record for standing up for what he believes in. I also have a feeling that the US government would think twice before taking on the Apple PR juggernaut head to head. It would be too closely matched for comfort. Apple probably have greater mind-share than any of the political parties. As you say, it would be an interesting standoff!
- jkestner 12y ago
  It's a little discomforting that we're hoping that corporations, presumably guided by a profit motive, will defend us against the government formed for the people (though more heavily influenced by other corporations). Even if Apple is trustworthy for a company, I'm not going to enjoy the future in which we pick our favorite companies to enact policy. Now, this is obviously happening to Google, et al, as well, so a joint action by the captains of industry — an appeal to the public more than the court — will be more effective.
  - mindcrime 12y ago
    Nothing wrong with "profit motive". Remember: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. ~~ Adam Smith That said, I'd personally like to see less power aggregated into the hands of both governments and big mega-corporations. But the big difference between the two, to my mind, is that governments have a near monopoly on "legitimate" use of force, and have lots of men with guns, tanks, bombers, nukes, etc. at their disposal. Corporations mostly lack those things, except to the extent that they collude with the governments.
    - jkestner 12y ago
      Yeah, I agree that profit motive is a motive I can work with. I guess libertarianism can be appealing when the government acts like a tumor. The government's monopoly on legitimate use of force is more relevant in less developed countries. Here, you can do more damage more easily by attacking computer-controlled infrastructure. (Imagine if the NRA was pointed at the real threat? Maybe they'd look a little like Anonymous.)
fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
There is a good chance that Cook, like anyone else is vulnerable to other charges; and in case he is a saint, they would just make something up. It won't be 'brave champion of freedom Tim Cook takes a principled stand and is persecuted by the NSA for it.' It would be either something like what happened to Joseph Naccio, or worse.