I still like BGs argument (and do consider myself a hacker haha)
"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records. Let’s say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said ‘don’t make me cut this ribbon because you’ll make me cut it many times’.“
That is a ridiculous and misleading argument and Bill Gates should be ashamed of having made it.
The difference is that ribbon isn't hard to cut and so the bank wouldn't have to develop a whole new type of scissors to cut it and doing so doesn't weaken the security of a bunch of other bank records secured with similar ribbon.
Apple isn't an arm of military intelligence. They shouldn't be compelled to act as one, particularly when the task would take a month, yes.
It's not just about time. Part of Apple's product is security. The DOJ is asking them to weaken their product. This could cost Apple their business in the long run as foreign companies enter the fray and offer a secure product that Apple is no longer allowed to produce.
Keep in mind that there's a black market where hacks and exploits for various systems are sold by hackers and bought by intelligence agencies. If this software is created by Apple, there's a chance it could get out there and end up in the wrong hands.
We live a western society, not China. If more than 50% of the population wants the phone to be cracked it should be done. That's what we all agreed on living in a democracy. Law is formed by the wishes of majority.
I'm not a lawyer. Is the FBI asking something from Apple which is not legal? Than go to court.
Exactly. So why are we asking Apple to do something which Obama rebuked China for doing last year? [1]
> If more than 50% of the population wants the phone to be cracked it should be done
This isn't up to the public, it's up to the courts, who've been asked by the DOJ to consider the issue.
The public only comes into play around election time when there's a chance to vote in a new President. And, it's likely this decision will be made before Obama leaves office.
> Law is formed by the wishes of majority
No.. Law is created by elected officials who are tasked with studying the law more closely than the general public
I can't imagine a country where 80% of the population is against abortion, and it still would be legal. In some indirect way law reflects what a population wants. Even the constitution can be changed with enough votes in parlement (at least in The Netherlands, US I don't know).
So the question is still open, is there any legal ground in what the FBI is asking from Apple?
And if there is, should the cooperate? And what would be the alternative, leave America?
"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records. Let’s say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said ‘don’t make me cut this ribbon because you’ll make me cut it many times’.“
(https://www.yahoo.com/tech/bill-gates-says-apple-unlock-0451...)