Apple vs FBI passionate arguments

In the words of politicians, ‘Make no mistake, we the government want to know all your secrets.’ We want to see what you look like naked, we want to know who you are having sex with, but most of all we want to know all about your most private and intimate thoughts.


It is hard to find an article on the topic of the FBI trying to force Apple by way of the court to pry into a person’s privacy that is not written without passion. The how and what methods are for the most part irrelevant as it is the goal of not allowing anybody to have privacy. Some people argue for the case of the government, and some people argue for privacy. However one thing is certain, the people that are pro-government for having a look at private things think that there will actually be some moral or ethical limit that keeps the government from knowing everything and stopping at some point. An example of that self-limitation has yet to be seen.

It is easy to see both sides as seen from Apple’s and the FBI’s viewpoint. In the wake of what Edward Snowden showed us, people have wanted their privacy back. The vigor that the FBI is putting into wanting a look is a true read of their desire to know and see everything. The fact that they are bumping into what can be best defined as a data suicide function of the latest I-Phones underscores what is hidden behind the FBI’s cover story. In all of this we must not forget the information they seek may not even exist, and things are moving forward with the assumption it does.

But the story we want to discuss is the passion of both arguments. This is a rare case of extreme and opposite views with no middle positions. In the goal of leaving no stone unturned, this is just one of those things. You could compare this to the days before DNA testing was available. Accurate information without ego driven lawyers who are willing to bend the truth or withhold evidence was what made things work. So in this case the I-Phone’s DNA is not available. As for who may have been called from that phone, that information is available from other sources already and no need to open the phone to find that.

For the people who are siding with Apple, they are the most in tune with reality. We have seen demonstrations of computer cameras being activated remotely without knowledge or consent of the computer’s owner. We have seen how easy it is for even well protected computer systems to get hacked. We have seen identity theft and other personal harm come to people by backdoor entry into a person’s private information. So by siding with Apple removing the option of a hack and destroying data in hack attempts is truly the safest. So if the data suicide feature of the phone is tripped, the owner can restore the data from their protected offline archive. This can be compared to the remote stolen phone function that had 95% of the people wanting it. The 5% that did not want it were the people that wanted to steal the phone. That translates to unanimous, and we see no difference in this case.



Comments are closed.