<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>On Mar 28, 2016, at 5:16 PM, William Flynn Wallace <<a href="mailto:foozler83@gmail.com">foozler83@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Anders Sandberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:anders@aleph.se" target="_blank">anders@aleph.se</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 2016-03-28 23:47, spike wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The feds hacked the phone.<br>
I respectfully request<br>
Your thoughts on this please.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Will they dare to use evidence in court?<br>
<br>
"Cracking" might be facesaving withdrawal FUDing Apple encryption.<br>
<br>
Incentive for Apple et al. for really safe systems next version.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Anders Sandberg<br>
Future of Humanity Institute<br>
Oxford Martin School<br>
Oxford University</font></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'comic sans ms',sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0);display:inline">​What's the issue? Commission of felonies, especially those involving national security, erases all privacy expectations, or should. This is far from just random scanning of everyone's data.</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My understanding of it was the FBI already had such tools and the idea was Apple wanted to avoid always having to develop software pro bono for hacking their phones. And the civil libertarian argument would be the one Apple offered: you don't need access to every phone in this instance. Yes, you can argue that if X commits a crime -- let's leave out 'felony' since that's defined by the state* -- X should not expect privacy for things related to that crime, but what about everyone else? Does X committing a crime abrogate everyone else's right to privacy, especially if they had nothing directly to do with X's crime?</div><br><div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Regards,</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Dan</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> Sample my Kindle books via:</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><font color="#000000" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://author.to/DanUst" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">http://author.to/DanUst</a></font></div></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><br></div><div style="line-height: normal;">* The state could create new laws saying that our discussion here is now a felony. What would that tell us?</div><div><br></div></div></div></body></html>