Oh, What Will They Do Now?

Both Apple and Google announce that their new OS’s will make it harder to retrieve data from a locked device. This article, http://www.androidauthority.com/law-enforcement-smartphone-encryption-529580/ mentions some of the reaction from law enforcement. The article, quoting Ronald Hosko, a former FBI agent, who said: "The level of privacy described by Apple and Google is ‘wonderful until it’s your kid who is kidnapped and being abused, and because of the technology, we can’t get to them,’”

So, there you have it. This privacy thing is evil. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

I don’t know about the US, it is a sick country through and through, just look to N.Y. where a student got arrested on the word of somebody how cried ‘Child Abuse’ and then left the country. In the rest of the world, a child is more likely to be abused at home in the family, then to be kidnapped. You just can not have freedom and absolute safety, they fit together like a square peg in a round hole. I know a place where you get three square meals a day and noting untoward hardly ever happens - it’s called a prison.

What have become of, the land of the free and home of the brave - can we have that nation back please.

It’s an old trick, using children for fear mongering. Many times in the legislature, there would be a bill to be considered. If it looks like there is going to be not enough support for the bill, someone will tack on an amendment pertaining to ‘child safety’ or ‘child welfare’. Then, if someone opposes the bill, then, the ‘child’ part becomes the primary focus of the bill in the media. There is outrage over someone not supporting a law pertaining to children.

That is what I call ‘official’ exploitation of children.

1 Like

And that is one reason why at hate parents a lot more than I hate children.

Well said. The problem with a lot of politics is that there is quite often a large disconnect between what politicians believe and what they say. It’s very difficult to find their true motives.

The motives are not difficult at all, just the details. I just ask: “In what way is this politician going to benefit from this? How will he enrich himself or get more power from it?” But, then, I’m very, very, cynical of all politicians. I truly believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with a person seeking a position to determine the lives of the many.

1 Like

Well spoken

1 Like

I agree 100% many, most, almost all politicians are in it for themselves.

To be fair, I do believe that there are some, when going into office, have proper motives. But, the system either flushes them out, or corrupts them. It is rare, in the US, that a congressman or senator leaves office not substantially wealthier than when he went into office.

I remember Dan Carlin (Common Sense podcast), talking about corporation in American government and saying that it has reached a point, where government is not function any more. The most disheartening thing about it is, that the media is not really talking about it, asking the hard questions and holding politicians accountable.

We have career politicians who are usually in it for their own personal benefit from day one.

We also have people who have real desire to make the world a better place and believe their own personal view is the answer. For me this second group often have the correct motives and serve a useful function as advocates for their own personal causes.

I personally make make no apologies for advocating the causes the causes that are important to me, I am not going to list them but if you have followed my comments on other topics I have created or responded to. I’m sure you have some idea of my politics.

For this group when entering main stream politics you have two choices. Either disappear quickly because you are on your own or pick the party you feel is the “least bad choice” and try to work within the system. If you go for this option you are forced into making back room deals and this more often than not leads to corruption.

For me I have no interest in becoming a party politician but will continue to argue for the causes I feel important.

Don’t worry,
some guy already got past the encryption using the keys iTunes uses to transfer music and stuff

What? Take time doing that and miss out on the latest of Brad and Angelina? :smile:

Now the head of the FBI is criticizing Apple and Google for taking steps to encrypt devices by default, saying it will potentially create a “black hole for law enforcement.”

I thought this quote was interesting: “And Google also said the government can get the same data elsewhere. ‘While we won’t be able to provide encryption keys to unlock phone data directly,’ the statement said, ‘there are still a number of avenues to obtain data through legal channels.’”

So, while data can be gotten through legal channels, that would mean that law enforcement would have to work to get it. They have gotten too use to it being easy. Perhaps that is the real issue.

Edit: from this article

Please respect our code of conduct which is simple: don't be a dick.