You need to be in power to make any real changes to policies that affect your rights, yes.
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.
Tim Cook and Other Tech Executives Meet with President Obama to Discuss Government Surveillance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You need to be in power to make any real changes to policies that affect your rights, yes.
Then remove the "Benjamin Franklin" from the quote. For those who didn't read the link: The Americans needed cash to build some defences for security against attack from the French, I think, doesn't matter really who it was. To do this, they needed to raise taxes. Including from the Penn family, who owned lots of Pennsylvania but lived abroad. The Penns denied the American's right to levy taxes, but offered to pay voluntarily for the defences. So the choice was to give up the freedom to tax the Penn family in exchange for the security by getting cash for the defences.
It's not like you don't already know the body of what is being discussed. Just a few slimy details are left out.
Basically assume the absolute worst is happening, then accept the fact that there is nothing you can do about it.
Put a webcam in your bathroom and set up a streaming website. It'll make you safer. Safety knows no boundaries.
"There's no smoke without fire". So if you happened to be the guy who was looking on Google to buy a backpack, while his wife was interested in a pressure cooker, and promptly had the police out in force at their home, you might think differently. Now the neighbours are wondering why this family got a visit by armed police, and they must have done something wrong because there's no smoke without fire. And their employers wonder how that could reflect on them, and there are plenty of people to do the job, so they'll hire someone else.
And seriously, if you haven't done anything in your life that you don't want people to know about, then you must be the most boring person in the world.
When did the government claim they were transparent? What does being transparent mean in terms of the government?
I think the government promised to be transparent with exceptions made for "national security".
Plus, doesn't anyone really believe there online activities can't be tracked.
Last edited:
If this was any more than a publicity move then this already should have happened (in private at some time). Otherwise government surveillance really isnt a big deal to Cook or apple seeing they knew this was going on the whole time.
A two headed coin
I was never comfortable with the patriot act. ...but, As a self proclaimed liberal I had naive trust Prez Obama and the government to not pull this bullsheet. Of course if this had been disclosed under Bush the younger, well, i would have had a sheetfit and asked for an impeachment...Alas, it is all the same. We live in an Orwellian society now like it or not. And abuse of this type of power is in its infancy. It will only get worse. Much worse.
I for one now feel the Telecom companies along with the tech companies are just an extension of the thing a Republican ,President Eisenhower, warrned us about: the Military Industrial Complex.
This is a sad situation where freedom and democracy are now being redifined in back rooms.
And, for the record, i will stop my George W bashing. I'm a liberal but not a hypocrite.
I was never comfortable with the patriot act. ...but, As a self proclaimed liberal I had naive trust Prez Obama and the government to not pull this bullsheet. Of course if this had been disclosed under Bush the younger, well, i would have had a sheetfit and asked for an impeachment...Alas, it is all the same. We live in an Orwellian society now like it or not. And abuse of this type of power is in its infancy. It will only get worse. Much worse.
I for one now feel the Telecom companies along with the tech companies are just an extension of the thing a Republican ,President Eisenhower, warrned us about: the Military Industrial Complex.
This is a sad situation where freedom and democracy are now being redifined in back rooms.
And, for the record, i will stop my George W bashing. I'm a liberal but not a hypocrite.
However at the bottom it says
I don't think the outrage comes from if the government is capable of tracking their internet activity. I think the outrage comes from the fact that they are and have been actively collecting everyone's internet activities without telling us.
And in that case,
We did not work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. We have rejected the idea of openness and decided to strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government by making decisions on your behalf without notice.
Wondering who really is the president of the United States, Obama or these CEOs
It's kind of like how in the NBA the commissioner David Stern really is just hired by the owners to carry out their wishes and be a face for the public to know / blame.
Yes.
Lavabit is small enough to be ignored by the NSA. Apple and others doing the same would've resulted in some real, and very rapid change.
Apple have lost my trust. My next phone will running something like Replicant, my next computer will be a Hackintosh as I need Mac OS for work.
I've already ditched mail and safari in favor of Mozilla.
It's posts like this that make me wish there were downvotes available for this forum. According the Constitution of the United States you have an innate right to be exempt from searches or seizures without due process of law or clear exigent circumstances. Regardless of whether you are innocent or guilty, you are guaranteed protection from behavior the likes of that seen in the Prism scandal. You can be a drug kingpin, a purveyor of child pornography, or a lily-white upstanding citizen that's never had a traffic ticket for fudged their taxes. The objective fact of your guilt or innocence is immaterial. The government does not give you this right, as it is yours by virtue of being a human being, but it is required by law to protect it. The problem with the "only criminals worry" argument is that it is predicated on the idea of innate depravity within the body politic, the institutionalized policy that the question of guilt or innocence for every person is simply a matter of time or circumstance. Such a policy essentially criminalizes the entire population, makes those attached to governmental organs wardens rather than public servants, and makes the transition from legal civil dissent to armed civil disturbance inevitable.
----------
Silent Circle followed suit and shut down Silent Mail. This crap is really going to murder service availability going forward.
Why do they want Tim Cook to testify ? I thought the government was looking for new ways to innovate the government surveillance .
.Oh and I'm sure Mozilla would never betray your trust either. Oh and make sure you use DuckDuckGo because they say they don't track you at all and you can believe it
Closed door meeting? !! Ha! So much for transparancy. Apple, Google, etc. need to tell Obama and his NSA to GTH!
Long live SNOWDEN!
Oh wait! Before I post this, let me ask... does Macrumors cooperate with PRISM? Oh crap! I already posted this! Aahhhhhhh!
Long live SNOWDEN!
Oh wait! Before I post this, let me ask... does Macrumors cooperate with PRISM? Oh crap! I already posted this! Aahhhhhhh!
Why do they want Tim Cook to testify ? I thought the government was looking for new ways to innovate the government surveillance
There's no testimony, this is Cook et al. getting it straight from the horse's mouth that the government expects absolute compliance, which it will obviously get in Apple's case or the FTC veto might just be "reversed", and that it expects all parties to respond cheerfully to any criticism with the fact that we have always been at war with Eurasia.
You sound as if closed door meetings deciding America's future haven't already been happening for decades now
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment
Posting things to Facebook is one thing. Using an enterprise level service that encrypts the transmission communication and then the storage of that content is then encrypted on the server it's sent to is completely different. That's just one layer of security to keep enterprise cloud services acting like local intranet and not the internet.
Then the Government comes along and request the decryption algorithm so they can access users files. Thanks.
Please sit down.