It is absolutely terrifying to think if Trump would be president, what kind of ********* he would spew out of his mouth regarding serious issues like these
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
President Obama: 'You Cannot Take an Absolutist View' on Encryption Issue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
there's hope still. privacy-depleter/national security hawk Lindsay Graham has recently changed his pro-FBI tune. admittedly, it may be to hide his gay porn trail-of-shame, but it's progress nonetheless.
Does Obama not realize that he is taking an absolutist position on this issue?
But his DoJ chief could, his FBI director could, his FEDGOV attorneys could. BS.President Obama said:
If you look at his speech vs policy over the last 7 years they are diametric opposites. It is how he diffuses resistance from his base.FloatingBones said:
cite:
https://politics.slashdot.org/story...s-at-some-of-the-all-time-greatest-redactions
Last edited:
That is why he have extraordinary rendition along with torture to get that extra private stuff we have in our minds. It is only frowned upon by the people using it as a method/source if they get caught by the people.
Logic: Well, actually, you can.
In other news: "President says stuff that totally validates stuff the people he appointed said and would grant his regime more power."
If you like your encryption you can keep your encryption.
Calls Snowden a traitor, because he published US gov secrets, like that the US gov is spying on US citizens. Demands the government have access to US citizens' private data. If the government isn't doing anything wrong, it should have nothing to hide, right?
Umm, it just goes to prove how incompetent he is, yet again. We need to make things secure and the government needs to get of their butts and do their job instead of forcing companies to help them.
Plus about another 3,000 or so...
People think Trump is scary...but the Obama administration is a whole different beast. And to think he actually taught con law at some point.
"Let's kill this US Citizen because we feel his propaganda is too good."
"Sure, a data dragnet on everyone is great."
"Let's make sure that the government can get into anything."
"Hey, let's track everyone's cellphones. Why not?"
"Let's kill this US Citizen because we feel his propaganda is too good."
"Sure, a data dragnet on everyone is great."
"Let's make sure that the government can get into anything."
"Hey, let's track everyone's cellphones. Why not?"
And what do you think Prez Obama will say when the back door he seeks inevitably escapes into the wild and lets "bad guys" into US govt systems? And the iphones of members of congress, the FBI, CIA, NSA, bla bla bla. It's only a matter of time.
Thanks, but I'll take absolute privacy every day. It's just not worth putting everyone in danger in the hopes of catching a handful of perverts. The terrorists will always find a way to be terrible. As I recall, Bin Laden used a messenger with a piece of paper. Low tech is hard to beat.
Thanks, but I'll take absolute privacy every day. It's just not worth putting everyone in danger in the hopes of catching a handful of perverts. The terrorists will always find a way to be terrible. As I recall, Bin Laden used a messenger with a piece of paper. Low tech is hard to beat.
With all due respect to him, it seems very disingenuous and grandstanding to ask things like "how are we supposed to catch a child pornographer" or "how are we supposed to catch a terrorist" without hacking into their phones. Haven't they caught said people in the past without doing so?
Have to disagree with Obama and even his analogy using airports but even putting that aside this is the same guy who keeps renewing Bush's Patriot Act and won't stop the NSA spying program and we are supposed to trust that the 3 letter agencies and Government is only trying to get into this "one' phone even though there are conveniently a dozen phones lined up that they also want to get into?
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with him about his "absolutist" statement. Yes I can and will take an absolutist stance because the Bill of Rights is absolute!
And as good old Ben Franklin reminded us, we should not ever sacrifice our liberty for some safety.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with him about his "absolutist" statement. Yes I can and will take an absolutist stance because the Bill of Rights is absolute!
And as good old Ben Franklin reminded us, we should not ever sacrifice our liberty for some safety.
It's funny how technology has empowered people to this level and to the point that it's pissing off the government on many levels. I hear so much ******** coming out of their mouths it's not even funny.
Apple - finish locking the door and throw away the key forever. I swear, you give one inch, the government wants 10 miles.
Apple - finish locking the door and throw away the key forever. I swear, you give one inch, the government wants 10 miles.
Well, at least we know that Obama won't be on the board of any tech companies after he retires...so that's something.
See, that's the thing. They have and they will continue to do so. They're just fear mongering now. Using peoples children and security to instill fear.
And this country elected that moron twice. No surprise here, he's got the pen and he uses it, often I read.
Wonder what his next executive order will be.
For the record- never even considered voting for that man- nor did I.
Have to respond to this.
1) I'm 100% behind apple on this case. The law the government is using is totally bogus and Apple should never make a back door by weakening their OS's
2) the only place that has never been accessible by law enforcement legally is some ones mind. IE if they get a court order they can physically access pretty much anything. So in the past law enforcement has been able to access a lot information because it was physically present. Also they could do wiretapping and get info that way (they still can)
3) smart phones hold way more information then ever before. Most of the info that use to exist in the physical world, is now on your smartphone so it needs to be over the top secure.
4)This creates a problem as more of this information is stored and encrypted, less info is legally available to law enforcement. Way less than it used to be.
5) I do not know what the solution is. I do not want a totalitarian state. But I also do not want a world where a smart criminal can use these incredibly important and useful tools to get away with horrible crimes that we can all imagine. Crimes that use to be able to be sovled or stopped because law enforcement could physically access information.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. I don't recall anyone screaming for the TSA to be born.
Well then, tell the Secret Service to open the doors to everyone to the White House.
It's been like this for a long time. They think we are supposed to trust them to protect us. Only thing worse than a slimy used car salesman is a career politician. Scumbags.
Likely the same as the current POTAS. Nothing much changes (except perhaps less polite and PC speech making). Neither has a clue about computer technology.
"You cannot take an absolutist view" because..."only the Sith deal in absolutes"