Apple, Other Silicon Valley Companies to Meet With White House Over Online Terrorism Recruitment

[Manderby]

Second world problems

*runs away*

 

[jonnysods]

I'm sure the White House would define it as anyone who is an NRA member.

Without starting an argument here, that's exactly the problem.

 

[2010mini]

According to the main stream liberal media, White American men in Oregon are the new terrorists. So we know what this is really all about: taking away our rights. Especially our right to bear arms and our right to free speech and our right to assemble.
[doublepost=1452232121][/doublepost]

Because that's their true objective - to control us.
[doublepost=1452232487][/doublepost]This is all about turning the masses into raceless, sexless drones who can be easily controlled like cattle. "Terrorism" has been a psychological operation of demoralization to break us down into malleable gimps which can be reformed into communist serfs who believe we are all "equal". Meanwhile they rule over us and siphon off the fruits of our labor.

Why is it any media that opposes our views is the "main stream media"???

If a bunch of armed Mexican Americans took over a gov't building for the same reasons AND threatened violence to peace officers. What do you think we would call them?

You can't call your protest peaceful when you have threatened violence.

 

[NT1440]

Spying on a relatively small number of "bag guys" has become a scare tactic excuse to strip privacy rights from everyone. I can't imagine that the govt's that are selling this garbage don't know that these people will find a way to get their msg out. IMHO the whole back door thing is nothing but a way for govt's to sniff out anyone who dares to challenge the bigger plans of the donor class - i.e. protesters of every sort.

Every digital surveillance technology implemented uses the same arguments. Once you realize this you can't stop seeing it.

If you frame it as stopping terrorists or child pornographers....well those probably aren't the people you're actually effecting in your policies. Keep an eye out for those keywords every time surveillance comes up for a vote and you'd be shocked at how frequently these boogeymen buzzwords are used.

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

The best recruitment tool ISIL has is US and its Allies foreign policy.

 

[Agent OrangeZ]

In the end no matter how many limitations or back doors they try to close or open, the bad guys will just find another way.

Why restrict the rest of us (as in jeopardize privacy over security). Apple has said in the past backdoors for government eventually become backdoors exploits for everyone else.

I feel the same way about Obama's supposed "gun control."

 

[unplugme71]

It's pretty hard to do anything really without jepoardizing everything from anonymous tipping on domestic abuse to reporters in non-neutral zones. The lengths that the US is going to under the guise of anti-terrorism is crazy.

Unfortunately, there's not much that the US common voters can do now while every major candidate is computer-illiterate or doesn't know how encryption works, so they do the "patriotic thing" and do whatever the NSA/FBI tells them to.

Not entirely true. The president of the US is not expected to know everything and only to consider the recommendations from subject matter experts. Those experts don't have to be in the FBI or NSA, but just your average citizen. In the tech world, it may very well be a security expert from SV.

 

[You are the One]

He is a politician. He tell all the parties what they want to hear.

That friendly guy who everyone likes, but never says much while saying a lot....

Not really, I refer to privacy policy. Look at the policy and strategic difference between Apple and basically any other industry leader that deal with masses of customer information. Read the EULA's and compare.

Privacy related information is not part of the Apple business model while it's an important part for most others. Some exist solely for the purpose of harvesting that kind of information.

 

[thermodynamic]

So in a free market where government involvement is bad, it's bad until the companies want handouts from it?

In seriousness, this collusion is pretty much welcomed - government has intelligence these companies would not be able to get on their own.

P.S. GWB put the kibosh on the 4th amendment last decade, made free speech zones (neutering the 1st amendment), and put in NSPD51 (a justifiable situation). Reagan put in REX84. Imagine if Obama did any of that, how the conservatives would slander him to hell and back -- and yet we were blissfully quiet when Bush did it all and more... or maybe every conservative wasn't born until 2008 or yesterday?

[doublepost=1452266258][/doublepost]

Not entirely true. The president of the US is not expected to know everything and only to consider the recommendations from subject matter experts. Those experts don't have to be in the FBI or NSA, but just your average citizen. In the tech world, it may very well be a security expert from SV.

Agreed. A president or leader, he or she is just as human and can't know everything either. Nobody knows everything and each one of us is the ultimate example of that, for varying reasons.
[doublepost=1452266400][/doublepost]

The best recruitment tool ISIL has is US and its Allies foreign policy.

Directly, or after a little bit of propaganda-skewing? Social media memes do that all the time, from just about every political perspective fathomable.

I'd bet real money there's more going on than just empty western-bashing...
[doublepost=1452266507][/doublepost]

Not really, I refer to privacy policy. Look at the policy and strategic difference between Apple and basically any other industry leader that deal with masses of customer information. Read the EULA's and compare.

Privacy related information is not part of the Apple business model while it's an important part for most others. Some exist solely for the purpose of harvesting that kind of information.

True.

And that also justifies to an extent higher prices one can pay...

Subsidies aren't always about adware...

 

[nt5672]

This problem is not solvable by the White House, it is caused by the White House. If the government was not so screwed up, Americans would not have any interest in joining groups dominated by centuries old ideas regarding the subjugation of women and children.

I for one, do not want to give up my freedom just so the government can appear to be doing something they are not.

 

[thermodynamic]

Why is it any media that opposes our views is the "main stream media"???

If a bunch of armed Mexican Americans took over a gov't building for the same reasons AND threatened violence to peace officers. What do you think we would call them?

You can't call your protest peaceful when you have threatened violence.

"Main stream media" - the culmination of six parent companies controlling all the media outlets, for which more existed until after the 1996 telecom act was passed thus allowing mergers to take place. I think that's how it went, or what people kept saying, I've never read all the verbiage in the act but - and according to the other memes - the cliche that congress probably didn't read any of it either is also likely true to a varying extent.

Mexicans - was it not a violent act for Mexican protesters to go to an American government building and put a Mexican flag over the American one. What if an American went to Mexico and put an American flag over Mexico's? How would that be perceived, what similarities and differences would present themselves in act and response and why and would either situation be truly justifiable as a metaphorically peaceful act or otherwise?

Define "threat". I can think of a few doozies, but those situations are not beyond the ability of anyone to discover (e.g. I don't need to speak what's ostensibly obvious).
[doublepost=1452266891][/doublepost]

This problem is not solvable by the White House, it is caused by the White House. If the government was not so screwed up, Americans would not have any interest in joining groups dominated by centuries old ideas regarding the subjugation of women and children.

I for one, do not want to give up my freedom just so the government can appear to be doing something they are not.

Caused, really?? Only by one entity (individual or group of, either directly or tangentially)?

Do you really hate it here so much? Which countries have better governments? Why not move there? And what are you giving up if you don't have it? Did someone point a gun at you to force you to choose giving it up? I know of no such situation or detail. What else might your "giving away" things imply for us to infer, and any accuracy or otherwise therein?

 

[npmacuser5]

Without starting an argument here, that's exactly the problem.

The problem is Extremism. In the past we as a country could at least have a civil dialog about controversial topics, agree to disagree in some cases, make changes in others, table the discussion for later. Today not even close. Organizations and even Government agencies do not engage in a dialog, they spew hate, arguments, name calling, do not listen, interrupt, totally despise the opposition and in general have No tolerance for the other sides point of views or them personally. In this environment it is surprising that anything gets done. Look at Congress and we can seeing not much gets done. In a dictatorship these issues go away, no arguments, do it this way or else. We however, have a very unique democratic society and as such it needs dialogs to function. If we as a society do not change then change will come. We may not like it. Just Saying.

 

[philosopherdog]

Putting back doors is the surest way to end western tech dominance. I can't think of anything dumber frankly. It's a good thing Apple is taking a strong stand on this because I don't trust Google or Microsoft on this one. Facebook has been an advocate as well. This nonsense debate has got to stop.

 

[nagromme]

If you want to make social media harder for terrorists to use, look no further than Facebook's privacy controls. A masterpiece of user-hostile interaction.

 

[MH01]

Not really, I refer to privacy policy. Look at the policy and strategic difference between Apple and basically any other industry leader that deal with masses of customer information. Read the EULA's and compare.

Privacy related information is not part of the Apple business model while it's an important part for most others. Some exist solely for the purpose of harvesting that kind of information.

If you believe in privacy policies sure. When information is passed onto a government agency, it's not public knowledge . EULA's are for apples protection , not yours

Also Apple policies were in place under jobs , he pushed back. Cook has not changed those policies to be better for the end user

 

[Jess13]

What does Apple have to do with social media? WH, FBI, NSA ,etc just want back-doors because they suck at their jobs. "Intelligence" these days is just for blackmail and not for actual crime fighting.

They have to weaken encryption/demand backdoors to spy on anyone but terrorists.

​

▹ http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/17/edward-snowden-letter-brazilian-people
▹ https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...f1342a-6727-11e3-8b5b-a77187b716a3_story.html
▹ http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/17/world/americas/snowden-nsa-brazil-letter/

 

[2010mini]

"Main stream media" - the culmination of six parent companies controlling all the media outlets, for which more existed until after the 1996 telecom act was passed thus allowing mergers to take place. I think that's how it went, or what people kept saying, I've never read all the verbiage in the act but - and according to the other memes - the cliche that congress probably didn't read any of it either is also likely true to a varying extent.

Mexicans - was it not a violent act for Mexican protesters to go to an American government building and put a Mexican flag over the American one. What if an American went to Mexico and put an American flag over Mexico's? How would that be perceived, what similarities and differences would present themselves in act and response and why and would either situation be truly justifiable as a metaphorically peaceful act or otherwise?

Define "threat". I can think of a few doozies, but those situations are not beyond the ability of anyone to discover (e.g. I don't need to speak what's ostensibly obvious).
[doublepost=1452266891][/doublepost]

Caused, really?? Only by one entity (individual or group of, either directly or tangentially)?

Do you really hate it here so much? Which countries have better governments? Why not move there? And what are you giving up if you don't have it? Did someone point a gun at you to force you to choose giving it up? I know of no such situation or detail. What else might your "giving away" things imply for us to infer, and any accuracy or otherwise therein?

Dude, even the media you consider to be outside of mainstream IS mainstream.

Going to a gov't building and putting up another country's flag is an act of vandalism. Now if they did that and then threaten to use violence at peace officers who come to legally remove them. Then yes that is an act of violence. Threats of violence against a Federal LEO is illegal the last time I checked.

Mind you I am all for non-violent civil unrest. But when you threaten to shoot a LEO, you lose your argument with me.

 

[You are the One]

This problem is not solvable by the White House, it is caused by the White House. If the government was not so screwed up, Americans would not have any interest in joining groups dominated by centuries old ideas regarding the subjugation of women and children.

The "problem" was created for the "solution" to be implemented. The system requires enemies in order to expand and enforce its control and survival. Now it wants to suck up the corporate tech industry into the all pervasive Orwellian echo system. The excuses are fabricated and lame.

If you believe in privacy policies sure. When information is passed onto a government agency, it's not public knowledge . EULA's are for apples protection , not yours

Also Apple policies were in place under jobs , he pushed back. Cook has not changed those policies to be better for the end user

Yes, I agree. I try to hope there are grades of hell.

 

[dasmb]

"This would be so much easier if we could get ISIS to sign a no-poaching agreement."

 

[thewap]

Don't worry, Apple really really cares about your privacy.

• Microsoft: "We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don't participate in it."[110][112]
• Yahoo!: "Yahoo! takes users' privacy very seriously. We do not provide the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network."[110] "Of the hundreds of millions of users we serve, an infinitesimal percentage will ever be the subject of a government data collection directive."[111]
• Facebook: "We do not provide any government organization with direct access to Facebook servers. When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law."[110]
• Google: "Google cares deeply about the security of our users' data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government 'back door' into our systems, but Google does not have a backdoor for the government to access private user data."[110] "[A]ny suggestion that Google is disclosing information about our users' internet activity on such a scale is completely false."[111]
• Apple: "We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order."[113]
• Dropbox: "We've seen reports that Dropbox might be asked to participate in a government program called PRISM. We are not part of any such program and remain committed to protecting our users' privacy."[110]

 

[Jess13]

Don't worry, Apple really really cares about your privacy.

Apple was the last known company to start participating in PRISM, a full year after Steve's death.

 

[nt5672]

Do you really hate it here so much? Which countries have better governments? Why not move there? And what are you giving up if you don't have it? Did someone point a gun at you to force you to choose giving it up? I know of no such situation or detail. What else might your "giving away" things imply for us to infer, and any accuracy or otherwise therein?

Really? I love living here and I believe that I have to fight for the right things so my children and grandchildren will love living here. Fighting for something better has nothing to do with being the worst or best and everything to do with getting better.

If you really look close at most of the terror related government activities, they address "movie plots", not real terror activities. In the process of the government claiming to protect us, we are giving up massive freedoms (here is the US). For example, every police department in every city and state can just take your belongings without any trial or conviction.

I assume you know that and are ok with it, most people are, I am not.

Yes, they are supposed to only do that to criminal suspects, but here's the rub, people are not criminals unless they are convicted (or at least that is how it is supposed to be.) But that does not matter anymore, the police promised to stop crime by taking the suspected criminal's goodies and we just stood by and let it happen. It has not really changed crime all that much, but hey the police and prosecutors are much more powerful. They can take anything that does not cause a public outcry. Some police departments are not corrupted yet, but a lot are.

People died to make this country free and now we are giving away that freedom to get something promised by the government that they cannot deliver. Wake up and read some history. We need to protect privacy at all costs and we need to take back our freedom. That is freedom to own personal property without it being taken, freedom to express our opinion (politically correct or not) without censure and punishment, and the freedom to protect information about ourselves. In the last 10 years we have lost in all of these areas.

 

[thewap]

Lawsuits filed against prism -

 

[Jess13]

Lawsuits filed against prism -

Stand With Rand.

 

[Mums]

Why is it any media that opposes our views is the "main stream media"???

If a bunch of armed Mexican Americans took over a gov't building for the same reasons AND threatened violence to peace officers. What do you think we would call them?

You can't call your protest peaceful when you have threatened violence.

It's the government that is threatening violence. Do not be deceived. Who's country is it?