TexasCHLforum.com

Bitter Clinger wrote:

TomsTXCHL wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:The majority of us can disagree without being disagreeable.

Wow, talk about being disagreeable!?!?!

You side with the govt and BHO. That is why you will not own any Apple products. I get it.

Well let's see Mr. "I aced Logic" . On Wed Feb 17, 2016 @ 10:02 am YOU wrote:

If it is possible for Apple to cooperate with that investigation without revealing their encryption methods to gov't, then maybe they should cooperate.

And your point is?

I am sure that you will need you have the last word as well, so have at it.

Wrong again sir--TAM wrote that, not me.

Carry on.

Bitter Clinger wrote:The majority of us can disagree without being disagreeable.

Wow, talk about being disagreeable!?!?!

You side with the govt and BHO. That is why you will not own any Apple products. I get it.

Bitter Clinger wrote:

TomsTXCHL wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:Did you really, intentionally mean to equate me with Barack Hussein Obama?

You think the govt should have access, he thinks the govt should have access.

Tell us how you are different?

Since you obviously failed Logic 101, let's use this as a teaching moment

Actually, I aced logic in college so I have apparently misunderstood your position, or you have failed to properly explain it.

Perhaps you will clarify, as the thrust of your subject is that you side with the Govt against Apple in this matter.

No thinking American will do this!

Bitter Clinger wrote:Did you really, intentionally mean to equate me with Barack Hussein Obama?

You think the govt should have access, he thinks the govt should have access.

Tell us how you are different?

Pawpaw wrote:It is not possible to create a hack to access just one iphone. If it works on that iphone, it will be usable on any iphone.

Apple knows that caving in to this court order would cost them some small number of individual accounts. They also know it would cost them much more in lost commercial and government business.

Creating this hack would cause lots of corporations to cancel their contracts. The same goes for many government agencies. The security of iOS is what got them those big customers to begin with.

Indeed Apple has been embarassed in the past by iOS security breeches. So they fixed it. Now the FBI is asking them to un-fix it, for one incident. Like banning guns for all because of one bad guy with a gun.

I hope Apple stands their ground. Let the FBI pursue their (already stale) investigation the old-fashioned way.

It's funny to see all the "experts" who say Apple can defeat the encryptions they employed for the newest iOS in an afternoon. Morons all.

Hopefully Apple will fight this all the way to the SCOTUS, so it won't even be addressed this year, leaving the FBI to wonder if there's anything but game scores on the one iPhone the BGs didn't destroyl. Probably nothing there anyway.

The Annoyed Man wrote:If it is possible for Apple to cooperate with that investigation without revealing their encryption methods to gov't, then maybe they should cooperate.

It sounds like the FBI has demanded that Apple create a new version of iOS to load to the iPhone in question, one which would give unfettered access to the encrypted data thereon. I believe Tim Cook that they don't have such a thing, and support his disinclination to try to build it just for this one incident. Heck there probably isn't anything of value on the bloody thing anyway--the BGs were careful to cover their tracks it seems.

It's all much ado about little AFAIC by comparison perhaps to the OBL fiasco. I mean, I never understood why the Obama administration was so very quick to tell the world they'd killed him and grabbed all his computers and whatnot. It seemed to me that they should have kept it quiet for absolutely as long as they possibly could while they analyzed all the data, and possibly surprised some people, vs. "hey all you creeps better run for the hills, we have the Big Guy's secret data on you".