I'm sorry, but you explicitly agree to this when you buy Apple hardware. It's very well known that Apple sells the most closed, controlled, and immalleable hardware/software of any company in the industry, on every single platform they operate. So people choose to support that design philosophy and then complain when it bites them in the ass? Sounds a bit ridiculous to me. If you'd like freedom with your hardware, and you'd like for it to be potentially useful after 5 years, buy an Android phone. I'd personally recommend one with good cyanogen support like the one plus line.
Yes, I know. It's clear there's an organised attempt to spread misinformation in this case. The angry mob is all in agreeance that the FBI wants a permanent backdoor and is trying to use corruption and intimidation to achieve it. This, of course, is complete hyperbole. Objective analysis is never applied due to Apple being notoriously good at marketing themselves as "the good guys". They couldn't be trying to pull one over on us could they? Why not? Remember people, this is a for-profit billionaire company several times over.
Furthermore, if the angry mob understood how encryption actually worked they'd realize there's little cause for alarm. Encryption is math. Good encryption is not breakable by anyone that doesn't have the key without significant work. The problem Apple encounters with it's encryption is there's no user convenient way to encrypt the data. Most people will tolerate, at most, a 4 or 5 digit numeric pin due to the complexity of input on a touch screen, and the frequency at which phones need to be accessed from a locked state. A 4 digit pin offers a measly 100,000 possibilities. Brute forcing 100,000 possibilities is a trivial task for even 10 year old consumer hardware. To protect against this, the software that analyses the password input will irreversibly erase the complex encryption keys in the chain after 10 failed pin attempts. An informed person might ask "well couldn't you just mount the data externally from the Apple software? ". Of course. And this is likely what the FBI did. They likely copied the data, mounted it externally, found someone that reversed engineered the encryption algorithm iPhones use, and brute forced the pin outside the iPhone.
Apple knows all this is possible. So you have to ask yourself "why would they bring attention to this?" Now the whole world knows that's it's pretty easy to break into an iPhone, and any phone for that matter. So why do it? Well, it could be that a major iPhone version is releasing this year. A major iPhone version that, by most leaked accounts, is shaping up to be pretty unimpressive. What better way to boost sales than to create an unnecessary controversy, scare everyone, and then sell the solution? Don't be surprised if the iPhone 7 very heavily campaigns on increased security, as was probably their intention all along - they just needed a controversy that would help sell it.
What will no doubt make this whole charade even more nefarious is that there's only really two ways increase security: further obfuscate and complicate the encryption method, or store the keys online. The more you complicate the encryption the more you sacrifice performance. It is also not a guaranteed solution. The guaranteed solution would be to store the encryption keys online. While certainly inconvenient it could easily be sold as a necessary burden for critical data - like with corporations. Of course, this would also have the added benefit of further entrenching iPhone users and companies into the Apple ecosystem. It will truly give Apple all the keys to the castle - all the control. Make sure you can always see the forest for the trees.
Yes they did. What you are relaying is simple misinformation, something this case has been utterly full of.
The judge ruled Tuesday that the Cupertino-based company had to provide "reasonable technical assistance" to the government in recovering data from the iPhone 5c, including bypassing the auto-erase function and allowing investigators to submit an unlimited number of passwords in their attempts to unlock the phone. Apple has five days to respond to the court if it believes that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."
Increasingly they are being touted as "the most secure" platform by this fanboi base. While normally that would be harmless, this base seems to include hipster-run "tech" (and I use that term lightly) websites like wired and engadget who gleefully distribute whatever propaganda the Apple PR department dreams up. While most informed people know these publications are garbage, they become a source of citogenesis for the naive and deluded helping Apple skew reality and incessantly reinforce their "good guy" image. The best run, most noble, most secure platform that is always looking out for the little guy right? Utterly laughable to the informed, but many people believe this.
Maybe people that liked it, or people that assume it's still the only way to play an avi. I personally still see people install winzip with all it's glorious spyware the minute they encounter a zip file, even though Windows has had native zip support for years. The point is, you have to tell people when you stop supporting a product. Perhaps if they saw a way to improve their image in the media they would have told us. "FBI and trend micro wants backdoor in QuickTime so they can hurt your children". Missed opportunity for their shameless PR machine indeed.
Now I have to call bullshit on you. The FBI didn't want Apple to unlock it, they wanted them to assist in getting around the security runtime so they could attempt to break the encryption without reverse engineering the methods. A reasonable request. As we know, they were forced to go the reverse engineering route because Apple decided to run a PR campaign with the case If you want to be pedantic to discredit an argument, calling Linux"an ecosystem of operating systems"is a poor way to do it. Linux is a kernel. A kernel commonly used with a core of gnu programs to produce an operating system typically referred to as gnu/Linux. Different flavors of these programs are called distributions, and when talking about gnu/Linux it is very common to just say "Linux".
My thoughts exactly. I wouldn't hire anyone from Google today. 5 or 10 years ago I might have, but the current staff has been on a mission to make every single product and service they have more bloated, less free, and less functional than it used to be. And they've succeeded. Maps, gmail, Android, you name it. The only exception might be the actual search engine.
Two weeks ago Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella told attendees of the company's annual Build developers conference of plans to "move our society forward," asking "profound questions" of his developers:"Is technology empowering people or is it displacing us? Is technology helping us preserve our enduring values such as privacy, or is it compromising it?"
What in the flying fuck? Microsoft knows exactly the negative impacts technology is, and has been, having on user freedom and privacy. They've been on the wrong side of this debate for at least 2 decades now. This man is either incredibly stupid or incredibly evil.
While this may be true, it's important to realize that humans aren't pack animals in the traditional sense. Our natural progression is to a tribal society, generally with a hierarchical order including a chieftain and several subservient families. This is unique in the animal kingdom. While polygamy might be common it is not your traditional pack with an alpha male and female where mating by other members is rarely tolerated. Birds don't live in tribal societies but they often are monogamous simply because the mother can't catch enough food for herself and the offspring. The monogamous pairing usually only lasts one mating season. "Cheating" females has been observed but if the male witnesses it, the nest is abandoned and the eggs will never hatch.
Because we have no other examples of tribal societies in nature it's really hard to make generalisations of human mating habits. This is compounded by humans very high level of consciousness. Some will tolerate polygamy for the male, some for both genders, and some not at all. Attracting factors are also extremely dynamic. The female has instinctual attractions to alpha qualities, provider qualities, and social status. Males are generally attracted to indications of high estrogen and fertility like full hair and lips and large bossoms. For both genders there are then influencing factors like family status, religion, cultural ideals, and personal taste. It's nearly impossible to develop a single theory for the mating practices of human populations. So whenever you hear someone making generalizations about "alphas and betas" it's most likely some kid with low confidence who's frustrated he can't get laid.
There's some truth to the notion that monogamous species are attracted to two types of mates: alpha, and provider. This is due to monogamy evolving only when two parents are needed to care for the offspring in order for it to survive. There's also evidence that the female in the monogamy will often attempt to be seeded by an alpha in secret. If her provider mate finds out he will abandon the nest. Yes, I'm mostly talking about birds. While humans have evolved monogamy as well, we have this pesky little thing called "a high level of consciousness". This makes it very difficult to throw around generalisations and make assumptions.
"You got a little d*ck" is always the worst. Unless you're a female, in which case "you were artificial selected for this job as a matter of affirmative action" would commonly apply.
The house is really really hard to break into. So the city council says that all builders that build in their district must provide a master key to be kept in a safe in city hall
You've already misunderstood the issue just like 99% of the people moaning about this case. The warrant wasn't for Apple to hand over the keys to the castle, it was for them to simply assist the FBI. The two most popular pieces of misinformation in this case are that the FBI wanted a permanent backdoor into IOS, and that the FBI somehow wants to "outlaw encryption math" (seriously, that last one is that silly). All the FBI needed was an easy way to disable the self destruct runtime process that IOS uses for entering pincodes. Any and all security measures could have been taken for Apple to maintain their long-term security. Setting up a secure lab, or doing the brute force themselves in Cupertino, for example. None of this was ever on the table because it's not really about security or justice to Apple, it's a public relations stunt. One that is being perpetuated with misinformation like that which you have swallowed and are now repeating.
The draft text will give judges authority to order tech companies to help law enforcement when asked to
And the summary uses the phrase "judges order tech companies to break encryption". I don't know which one of these idiot "tech websites" started this rhetoric, but it's getting really annoying. I can't figure out if they are willing Apple propagandists, or just completely retarded.
Good encryption can't be broken - It's a mathematical algorithm. What this bill is talking about is a warrant to get around security measures. Apple's idiotic anti-theft kill switch (that was also mandated by a nanny-state law from California) is not "encryption". It is a runtime process that monitors the number of attempts to enter a password and then deletes the encryption keys. It's like if you had a secure locker with a boobytrap mechanism that incinerated the contents when a brute force entry was detected. If the locker contained documentation written in a cipher that may contain information to solve a crime, and the FBI asked the company that made the locker to help them disable the boobytrap so they could try to take a look at it, you wouldn't claim they wanted to outlaw ciphers (unless you were a propagandist or moron). This whole issue is plagued with so much misinformation it's astonishing.
You're getting unfairly modded down. I fear the day might have come when Slashdot has turned into Reddit. I'll give you a tip about arch though. Don't try to use the core arch install from the website itself. It is minimal by design and isn't really intended to provide a full desktop experience. Use an arch flavor instead. My favorite is antergos. The install is very easy and it provides you with a complete graphic desktop system "our of the box".
As he said, it is definitely now possible. I have been using a Linux desktop at work for about 2 years now. It's integrated with our corporate Active Directory, Exchange, windows file shares, etc. The printers work, all my peripherals work, everything I need works. That being said, the process isn't for the faint of heart and is nowhere near stable enough that I'd deploy it to my users. So the next steps are clear: more automation, ease of configuration, and stability. Basically quality control and interface design work, which is not something the Linux community traditionally excels at. I am optimistic though.
Again you're being unimaginative and just considering your one short term use case. What I am arguing for is ideals. Ideals that consider long term implications for the whole of society. So you don't have much to worry about right now with having all your eggs in one basket. But you might if you were a member of an opposition party in east Berlin. The status quo would be to dismiss extraordinary concerns like that as irrelevant and paranoid, but history that is forgotten is doomed to repeat. This FBI case is a sign of things to come. The NSA revelations before it were a sign of things to come. When you put all your eggs in one basket, and trust that basket to someone else, eventually they will drop it... every time. And things are getting worse, not better. With the popularity of the cloud and the apathetic perpetuation of walled gardens, were making the concerns of the "Microsoft monopoly generation" before us look adorable. The state of personal computing and telecom is really scary. It's the most uncompetitive, unchecked, closed and controlled industry in the whole of free western civilization. And every day it gets worse and worse as we rely more and more on it.
Now we can't expect everyone to consider this before they make their choices. But I think it's fair to expect that technical people act with a bit more long term planning than "use whats best for the job". It is the responsibility of people in the tech industry to not just use whats best today, but whats going to be best tomorrow, and in the next decade, and for our children. Leave short term thinking to the business types. Technicians are supposed to value being proactive over being reactive.
Agreed. It's a dangerous game Apple is playing. The FBI asking Apple to help them circumvent their kill switch is not extraordinary. An encryption killswitch is a runtime process, it's circumventable regardless. To then spin this into an argument about freedom and encryption was just disingenuous. Furthermore, they've stirred up an angry mob based on false information, and stirred congress into passing legislation against strong encryption. With companies like Apple working so hard for us (as they'd love for you to believe) we don't need enemies.
You didn't really address what I said at all. I'm well aware of the "simply use the best tool for the job at this moment" mentality, I simply disagree with it. I actually wrote a 230 word explanation why I disagree with it.
I've thought about this for a long time as well. I've only been in the industry a bit over one decade, so admittedly less time than you, but I believe I've come to a different conclusion. When you buy an Apple computer only Apple gets paid. As you mentioned, it's Apple hardware ruining Apple software, which run a core of Apple programs that work well with Apple services, network equipment, and peripherals. They even now, of course, have an Apple store so they can get a 30% cut on anything they still haven't provided. Now assuming that this closed exclusive system is more secure (which I consider to be a dubious claim), is that even worth it? You don't have to have a very powerful imagination to think up some of the problems that could occur giving one company this much control over your computing needs. This FBI case is a great example. The world is in a state right now where those inclined to do so really only have to infiltrate a handful of companies to compromise everyone's data. If anything the world needs it's less consolidation and control, not more. We've spent the last three decades giving up freedom, choice, and healthy competition for convenience, ease of use, and ultimately a false sense of security. It's time for a new approach.
Right. They are presenting a non-existent technology to congress and instructing every member to not make their political career by exposing the facade. Makes sense.
Except you've already willingly allowed the government to define acceptable standards for software, and also gleefully put your entire personal computing infrastructure in couple large baskets. I'd be scared if I wasnt enjoying so much the last 3 decades of horrible decisions coming crashing down on all these morons.
This is posturing at best, utter ignorance at worst. Telegram, for example, is already the terrorist messaging program of choice. It has had end to end encryption since inception, which has to be at least a couple years by now. You'd think he'd know that.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but you explicitly agree to this when you buy Apple hardware. It's very well known that Apple sells the most closed, controlled, and immalleable hardware/software of any company in the industry, on every single platform they operate. So people choose to support that design philosophy and then complain when it bites them in the ass? Sounds a bit ridiculous to me. If you'd like freedom with your hardware, and you'd like for it to be potentially useful after 5 years, buy an Android phone. I'd personally recommend one with good cyanogen support like the one plus line.
Is this guy really a patriot or just an anarchist? The more I see of him, the less reasonable he becomes.
Yes, I know. It's clear there's an organised attempt to spread misinformation in this case. The angry mob is all in agreeance that the FBI wants a permanent backdoor and is trying to use corruption and intimidation to achieve it. This, of course, is complete hyperbole. Objective analysis is never applied due to Apple being notoriously good at marketing themselves as "the good guys". They couldn't be trying to pull one over on us could they? Why not? Remember people, this is a for-profit billionaire company several times over.
Furthermore, if the angry mob understood how encryption actually worked they'd realize there's little cause for alarm. Encryption is math. Good encryption is not breakable by anyone that doesn't have the key without significant work. The problem Apple encounters with it's encryption is there's no user convenient way to encrypt the data. Most people will tolerate, at most, a 4 or 5 digit numeric pin due to the complexity of input on a touch screen, and the frequency at which phones need to be accessed from a locked state. A 4 digit pin offers a measly 100,000 possibilities. Brute forcing 100,000 possibilities is a trivial task for even 10 year old consumer hardware. To protect against this, the software that analyses the password input will irreversibly erase the complex encryption keys in the chain after 10 failed pin attempts. An informed person might ask "well couldn't you just mount the data externally from the Apple software? ". Of course. And this is likely what the FBI did. They likely copied the data, mounted it externally, found someone that reversed engineered the encryption algorithm iPhones use, and brute forced the pin outside the iPhone.
Apple knows all this is possible. So you have to ask yourself "why would they bring attention to this?" Now the whole world knows that's it's pretty easy to break into an iPhone, and any phone for that matter. So why do it? Well, it could be that a major iPhone version is releasing this year. A major iPhone version that, by most leaked accounts, is shaping up to be pretty unimpressive. What better way to boost sales than to create an unnecessary controversy, scare everyone, and then sell the solution? Don't be surprised if the iPhone 7 very heavily campaigns on increased security, as was probably their intention all along - they just needed a controversy that would help sell it.
What will no doubt make this whole charade even more nefarious is that there's only really two ways increase security: further obfuscate and complicate the encryption method, or store the keys online. The more you complicate the encryption the more you sacrifice performance. It is also not a guaranteed solution. The guaranteed solution would be to store the encryption keys online. While certainly inconvenient it could easily be sold as a necessary burden for critical data - like with corporations. Of course, this would also have the added benefit of further entrenching iPhone users and companies into the Apple ecosystem. It will truly give Apple all the keys to the castle - all the control. Make sure you can always see the forest for the trees.
The judge ruled Tuesday that the Cupertino-based company had to provide "reasonable technical assistance" to the government in recovering data from the iPhone 5c, including bypassing the auto-erase function and allowing investigators to submit an unlimited number of passwords in their attempts to unlock the phone. Apple has five days to respond to the court if it believes that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."
Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/judge-forces-apple-help-unlock-san-bernardino-shooter-iphone-n519701
"Reasonable technical assistance" somehow got spun into "creating a permanent backdoor". I'll let you figure out who was doing the spinning.
Increasingly they are being touted as "the most secure" platform by this fanboi base. While normally that would be harmless, this base seems to include hipster-run "tech" (and I use that term lightly) websites like wired and engadget who gleefully distribute whatever propaganda the Apple PR department dreams up. While most informed people know these publications are garbage, they become a source of citogenesis for the naive and deluded helping Apple skew reality and incessantly reinforce their "good guy" image. The best run, most noble, most secure platform that is always looking out for the little guy right? Utterly laughable to the informed, but many people believe this.
Maybe people that liked it, or people that assume it's still the only way to play an avi. I personally still see people install winzip with all it's glorious spyware the minute they encounter a zip file, even though Windows has had native zip support for years. The point is, you have to tell people when you stop supporting a product. Perhaps if they saw a way to improve their image in the media they would have told us. "FBI and trend micro wants backdoor in QuickTime so they can hurt your children". Missed opportunity for their shameless PR machine indeed.
Sounds evil to me.
Now I have to call bullshit on you. The FBI didn't want Apple to unlock it, they wanted them to assist in getting around the security runtime so they could attempt to break the encryption without reverse engineering the methods. A reasonable request. As we know, they were forced to go the reverse engineering route because Apple decided to run a PR campaign with the case If you want to be pedantic to discredit an argument, calling Linux"an ecosystem of operating systems"is a poor way to do it. Linux is a kernel. A kernel commonly used with a core of gnu programs to produce an operating system typically referred to as gnu/Linux. Different flavors of these programs are called distributions, and when talking about gnu/Linux it is very common to just say "Linux".
My thoughts exactly. I wouldn't hire anyone from Google today. 5 or 10 years ago I might have, but the current staff has been on a mission to make every single product and service they have more bloated, less free, and less functional than it used to be. And they've succeeded. Maps, gmail, Android, you name it. The only exception might be the actual search engine.
Two weeks ago Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella told attendees of the company's annual Build developers conference of plans to "move our society forward," asking "profound questions" of his developers:"Is technology empowering people or is it displacing us? Is technology helping us preserve our enduring values such as privacy, or is it compromising it?"
What in the flying fuck? Microsoft knows exactly the negative impacts technology is, and has been, having on user freedom and privacy. They've been on the wrong side of this debate for at least 2 decades now. This man is either incredibly stupid or incredibly evil.
While this may be true, it's important to realize that humans aren't pack animals in the traditional sense. Our natural progression is to a tribal society, generally with a hierarchical order including a chieftain and several subservient families. This is unique in the animal kingdom. While polygamy might be common it is not your traditional pack with an alpha male and female where mating by other members is rarely tolerated. Birds don't live in tribal societies but they often are monogamous simply because the mother can't catch enough food for herself and the offspring. The monogamous pairing usually only lasts one mating season. "Cheating" females has been observed but if the male witnesses it, the nest is abandoned and the eggs will never hatch.
Because we have no other examples of tribal societies in nature it's really hard to make generalisations of human mating habits. This is compounded by humans very high level of consciousness. Some will tolerate polygamy for the male, some for both genders, and some not at all. Attracting factors are also extremely dynamic. The female has instinctual attractions to alpha qualities, provider qualities, and social status. Males are generally attracted to indications of high estrogen and fertility like full hair and lips and large bossoms. For both genders there are then influencing factors like family status, religion, cultural ideals, and personal taste. It's nearly impossible to develop a single theory for the mating practices of human populations. So whenever you hear someone making generalizations about "alphas and betas" it's most likely some kid with low confidence who's frustrated he can't get laid.
There's some truth to the notion that monogamous species are attracted to two types of mates: alpha, and provider. This is due to monogamy evolving only when two parents are needed to care for the offspring in order for it to survive. There's also evidence that the female in the monogamy will often attempt to be seeded by an alpha in secret. If her provider mate finds out he will abandon the nest. Yes, I'm mostly talking about birds. While humans have evolved monogamy as well, we have this pesky little thing called "a high level of consciousness". This makes it very difficult to throw around generalisations and make assumptions.
"You got a little d*ck" is always the worst. Unless you're a female, in which case "you were artificial selected for this job as a matter of affirmative action" would commonly apply.
I've only known like two people that have them and they are overly eager to tell me how wonderful they are. A surefire sign of latent buyer's remorse.
The house is really really hard to break into. So the city council says that all builders that build in their district must provide a master key to be kept in a safe in city hall
You've already misunderstood the issue just like 99% of the people moaning about this case. The warrant wasn't for Apple to hand over the keys to the castle, it was for them to simply assist the FBI. The two most popular pieces of misinformation in this case are that the FBI wanted a permanent backdoor into IOS, and that the FBI somehow wants to "outlaw encryption math" (seriously, that last one is that silly). All the FBI needed was an easy way to disable the self destruct runtime process that IOS uses for entering pincodes. Any and all security measures could have been taken for Apple to maintain their long-term security. Setting up a secure lab, or doing the brute force themselves in Cupertino, for example. None of this was ever on the table because it's not really about security or justice to Apple, it's a public relations stunt. One that is being perpetuated with misinformation like that which you have swallowed and are now repeating.
The draft text will give judges authority to order tech companies to help law enforcement when asked to
And the summary uses the phrase "judges order tech companies to break encryption". I don't know which one of these idiot "tech websites" started this rhetoric, but it's getting really annoying. I can't figure out if they are willing Apple propagandists, or just completely retarded.
Good encryption can't be broken - It's a mathematical algorithm. What this bill is talking about is a warrant to get around security measures. Apple's idiotic anti-theft kill switch (that was also mandated by a nanny-state law from California) is not "encryption". It is a runtime process that monitors the number of attempts to enter a password and then deletes the encryption keys. It's like if you had a secure locker with a boobytrap mechanism that incinerated the contents when a brute force entry was detected. If the locker contained documentation written in a cipher that may contain information to solve a crime, and the FBI asked the company that made the locker to help them disable the boobytrap so they could try to take a look at it, you wouldn't claim they wanted to outlaw ciphers (unless you were a propagandist or moron). This whole issue is plagued with so much misinformation it's astonishing.
You're getting unfairly modded down. I fear the day might have come when Slashdot has turned into Reddit. I'll give you a tip about arch though. Don't try to use the core arch install from the website itself. It is minimal by design and isn't really intended to provide a full desktop experience. Use an arch flavor instead. My favorite is antergos. The install is very easy and it provides you with a complete graphic desktop system "our of the box".
As he said, it is definitely now possible. I have been using a Linux desktop at work for about 2 years now. It's integrated with our corporate Active Directory, Exchange, windows file shares, etc. The printers work, all my peripherals work, everything I need works. That being said, the process isn't for the faint of heart and is nowhere near stable enough that I'd deploy it to my users. So the next steps are clear: more automation, ease of configuration, and stability. Basically quality control and interface design work, which is not something the Linux community traditionally excels at. I am optimistic though.
Again you're being unimaginative and just considering your one short term use case. What I am arguing for is ideals. Ideals that consider long term implications for the whole of society. So you don't have much to worry about right now with having all your eggs in one basket. But you might if you were a member of an opposition party in east Berlin. The status quo would be to dismiss extraordinary concerns like that as irrelevant and paranoid, but history that is forgotten is doomed to repeat. This FBI case is a sign of things to come. The NSA revelations before it were a sign of things to come. When you put all your eggs in one basket, and trust that basket to someone else, eventually they will drop it... every time. And things are getting worse, not better. With the popularity of the cloud and the apathetic perpetuation of walled gardens, were making the concerns of the "Microsoft monopoly generation" before us look adorable. The state of personal computing and telecom is really scary. It's the most uncompetitive, unchecked, closed and controlled industry in the whole of free western civilization. And every day it gets worse and worse as we rely more and more on it.
Now we can't expect everyone to consider this before they make their choices. But I think it's fair to expect that technical people act with a bit more long term planning than "use whats best for the job". It is the responsibility of people in the tech industry to not just use whats best today, but whats going to be best tomorrow, and in the next decade, and for our children. Leave short term thinking to the business types. Technicians are supposed to value being proactive over being reactive.
Agreed. It's a dangerous game Apple is playing. The FBI asking Apple to help them circumvent their kill switch is not extraordinary. An encryption killswitch is a runtime process, it's circumventable regardless. To then spin this into an argument about freedom and encryption was just disingenuous. Furthermore, they've stirred up an angry mob based on false information, and stirred congress into passing legislation against strong encryption. With companies like Apple working so hard for us (as they'd love for you to believe) we don't need enemies.
You didn't really address what I said at all. I'm well aware of the "simply use the best tool for the job at this moment" mentality, I simply disagree with it. I actually wrote a 230 word explanation why I disagree with it.
I've thought about this for a long time as well. I've only been in the industry a bit over one decade, so admittedly less time than you, but I believe I've come to a different conclusion. When you buy an Apple computer only Apple gets paid. As you mentioned, it's Apple hardware ruining Apple software, which run a core of Apple programs that work well with Apple services, network equipment, and peripherals. They even now, of course, have an Apple store so they can get a 30% cut on anything they still haven't provided. Now assuming that this closed exclusive system is more secure (which I consider to be a dubious claim), is that even worth it? You don't have to have a very powerful imagination to think up some of the problems that could occur giving one company this much control over your computing needs. This FBI case is a great example. The world is in a state right now where those inclined to do so really only have to infiltrate a handful of companies to compromise everyone's data. If anything the world needs it's less consolidation and control, not more. We've spent the last three decades giving up freedom, choice, and healthy competition for convenience, ease of use, and ultimately a false sense of security. It's time for a new approach.
Right. They are presenting a non-existent technology to congress and instructing every member to not make their political career by exposing the facade. Makes sense.
Except you've already willingly allowed the government to define acceptable standards for software, and also gleefully put your entire personal computing infrastructure in couple large baskets. I'd be scared if I wasnt enjoying so much the last 3 decades of horrible decisions coming crashing down on all these morons.
This is posturing at best, utter ignorance at worst. Telegram, for example, is already the terrorist messaging program of choice. It has had end to end encryption since inception, which has to be at least a couple years by now. You'd think he'd know that.