Was there a Q&A afterwards?
And if so, was the first Q: "Mr President, do you have the *slightest* clue what the hell you are talking about???"
Amid the row between Apple and the FBI over the unlocking of a mass murderer's iPhone, President Barack Obama has told the tech world to suck it up and do what the Feds want. Speaking today at hipster-circle-jerk SXSW in Austin, Texas, the United States' Commander in Chief said phones and computers cannot be unbreakable "black …
He has a clue. President by president, regardless of party has made the government more and more intrusive. Be VERY AFRAID we are told to be of this technology. Pedophiles will multiply like rabbits if they have encryption and terrorists will be untrackable if their phones are encrypted. Terrorists and pedophiles are to dumb to encrypt by other means.
There should have been, as when it comes to... "The whole Snowden disclosure episode elevated people’s suspicions. The Snowden issue vastly overstated the dangers to US citizens in terms of spying."
...I'd ask, "Does that mean you're going to let him come back and not threaten to throw the whole damn legal library at him?"
FYI according to The Washington Post
"Surprise" , "the NSA-data will soon routinely be used for domestic policing that has nothing to do with terrorism"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/03/10/surprise-nsa-data-will-soon-routinely-be-used-for-domestic-policing-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-terrorism/
then they end with this , OK I'll go bold. . .and shout
. . .SOBERING REMINDER THAT ANY POWERS WE GRANT TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF NATIONAL SECURITY WILL INEVITABLY BE USED JUST ABOUT EVERYWHERE ELSE. AND EXTRAORDINARY POWERS WE GRANT GOVERNMENT IN WARTIME RARELY GO AWAY ONCE THE WAR IS OVER. AND, OF COURSE, THE NIFTY THING FOR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ABOUT A “WAR ON TERRORISM” IS THAT IT’S A WAR THAT WILL NEVER FORMALLY END.
Please read up on such things as amendment #1, and amendment #4, and no I won't give you the combination to my safe, see amendment #5.
Lots of people can come up with codes and cyphers (and we all do!), and you aren't entitled to break them.
So, can you keep a secret? So can I!!
p.s. How about telling this to your former Secretary of State.
@Michael Habel
You mean the $100 bill that some other person with nothing better to do, has decided that it's also a bad thing. It makes crime of all kinds easier.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/16/its-time-to-kill-the-100-bill/
That paper was written by Peter Sands? The same Peter Sands that advised the UK government and was instrumental in formulating the bank bail-out in 2009? The one running Standard Chartered when it copped squillions in fines for assisting money laundering with sanctioned countries? The one who steered said bank's share price off a cliff in chasing profits through bad loans and an obviously unsustainable commodity boom? Yeah, you should totally listen to that guy.
No, no he's not. He was an adjunct who "lectured" on topics such as "Blacks and the Law" and was picked because of his colour and politics, not because of his knowledge and ability.
Obama's actual knowledge of the constitution can probably be written on one side of a piece of paper, using big letters.
"Obama's actual knowledge of the constitution can probably be written on one side of a piece of paper, using big letters."
He's a Harvard-trained civil rights lawyer with a 20-year legislative career who's been POTUS for nearly 8 years. He also spent 12 years as lecturer and then senior lecturer on constitutional law at Chicago.
I suspect the constitution may have come up a bit more often than you're suggesting.
If it wasn't for encryption the internet wouldn't exist and we wouldn't need publicly available strong crypto. The fact that seemingly everybody in government in at least five eyes countries is too stupid and ignorant to know this only underlines the hilarity.
And still nobody has talked about what they'd do about foreign-based crypto projects that are open source.
"body searches and scanners by the TSA at airports, which obviously thwarts terrorism"
Not in the slightest, given the recent security audits of airports, the only thing preventing terrorism is pure luck on our part. In a recent audit of Denver International, the TSA failed 67 out of 68 tests in which the auditors were able to get pipe bombs through security.
"Actual quote: "Everybody’s walking around with a Swiss bank account in their pocket. So there has to be some concession for the need to get into that information.""
That doesn't even make any sense... But from what I'm able to parse is that he wants to know what is in our phones, except without a warrant, that's a blatant violation of the Bill of Rights.
"If your argument is strong encryption no matter what, and we can and should create black boxes, that, I think, does not strike the kind of balance we have lived with for 200 or 300 years, and it’s fetishizing our phones above every other value."
Yeah, but we also used to feed people mercury and bleed people for hundreds of years as well. Phones have become so entwined with our personal lives, they contain very, very personal information including the people we communicate with, the places we've been, and even our banking and medical information.
"If there is probable cause to think that you have abducted a child, or that you are engaging in a terrorist plot, or you are guilty of some serious crime, law enforcement can appear at your doorstep and say 'I have a warrant' and go into your bedroom to rifle through your underwear and see if there's any evidence of wrongdoing."
Oh goody, the old "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" argument. What the hell ever happened to "Innocent until proven guilty"?
If you are concerned about terrorists, then you should be working on building a society that terrorists don't want to destroy. With our treatment of refugees and military action in the Middle East, we have painted ourselves as an evil empire that seeks to wipe out Islam, making it easy for the terrorists to gain power. The Islamic State recruiting spiel is pretty much "The West doesn't care about us, they just drop bombs on us and destroy our livelihoods, and after doing so, they refuse to help us. We will give you money and food to support your family, we will take care of you after your death, no go show that Evil Empire that we will not tolerate them anymore! Stop them from harming your innocent countrymen!". Violating our civil and human rights only feeds that narrative, making these radicals stronger, so we have to violate more human rights and kill more people....
Just a little more... then a little more... then a little more... until, what? How far do we go until we have gone far enough? And what about pointing that "narrow" beam of enlightenment upon yourself and upon those who carry your water? Does the attitude change then?
This from an administration and a man who has claimed executive privilege in an investigation involving his own Department of "Justice," has fought tooth and nail FOI requests on his various alphabet departments, obfuscating as much of its activities as possible, meanwhile mocking and belittling those who demand to know the inner workings of its politburos.
Then to speak about the laws of the land while ignoring and undermining law at every turn, laughing derisively when anyone challenges the actions.
There was a time when I hoped to work for the NSA, because I believed that by getting such a post I would be in a position to help people better protect themselves and work to coordinate better protection for our infrastructures at a national level. I followed an academic path to accomplish this, but the closer I got the more I noticed how my moral compass just did not align with what was transpiring in our government. Now, instead, I find myself pursuing a path to advocate against the directions in which our government is lunging head-first, much at the cost of its citizenry.
To speak of the law of the land, while at the same time taking the Constitution as if it consisted of mere suggestions and guidelines, is shameful. But you will not be ashamed, will you, because you are indeed a True Believer.
So, Mr. President, with no due respect, screw you and the horse.
And to think that this is the guy who got a Nobel Peace Prize simply for being elected.
He has finally shown what he actually is : a puppet in the hands of the true power in America - the men who have the money.
Those men are white, old and paranoid. They are the 1%ers who need to keep the money flowing (towards them), and the only way they to do that is to keep people scared and under control.
Breaking encryption is not going to help against terrorists. The CIA knew all about the men who committed the atrocities of 9/11 and they did nothing to stop it. Had they had access to encrypted data, nothing would have changed.
No, breaking encryption is just another feather in the cap of the fascists who are now running this once great country. One more means of tapping into the lives of people in order to break the ones who risk being a nuisance - the people who want to stand up for their rights.
But that is the one great thing that America still is - a country that can. I'm hoping that, when it comes to doing, the solution will not be too bloody.
Pascal...you are spot on. When you fight through all the mist and murk it is purely the top 1% of the 1% making sure they keep hold of what they stole.
They need to find the future leaders (read trouble makers in their speech) that others may follow and deal with them before they become a potential challenge.
The last thing they want is to be dragged up against a school wall and shot.
Ah, yes, the simplistic idea that there's a small cadre of Those Who Control on whom we can blame everything.
It used to be evil secret societies from the deep past, or the Jews, or ... But now it's "the one percent".
last time I looked, none of the rich (except the vile Pelosi, perhaps) actually passed laws. So you're actually claiming, to the extent that your claims have any merit, that the elected representatives in all Western societies are corrupt.
Maybe that's a root cause to go worry about, rather than pointing at some group and saying "they're bribing".
Indeed, it's blatantly obvious and simple. Everyone can be bought for the right price. Democracy hasn't existed ever. Sure the rabble can vote this way and that but the same agenda carries on.
The top 1% of the 1% are worried that the rabble will realise that revolution (like in Eastern Europe in the early 90's) is the only alternative available to them. They need to make sure that never happens. The only way they can do that is monitor us all to nip dissent in the bud.
It was a smart move to put Obama in place. No matter what he does or doesn't do, he will always be the first black president.
Nobody will remember that he didn't stop Guantanamo or that he did increase drone strikes... He'll always be the first black president.
So while they're (Obama and his superiors) having a good run, they might as well take encryption, too.
This will give the next Muppet President a running start and they can go straight to microchipping us like dogs.
So he's made a little side bet with someone on how much complete bollocks he can talk in his last few months. I've been a staunch supporter of the chap throughout the racist hatred he suffered, throughout all the crap where NOTHING he did was right... and now he's beginning to become exactly like the ones he was defended FROM.
@Big John
Obama wasn't elected to succeed. Rather set up to fail. Race has nothing to do with it. He was a senator from Illinois*, the crappiest state in the union. He has close ties with Chicago**, corrupt and crime ridden.
*I'm a native
**Studied there
He didn't suffer any significant amount of racist hatred. That was a convenient accusation by the left, which equates opposition to a black person's ideas to opposition to black people (if it suits their agenda). They never appeared to notice the irony: by insisting that opposition to Obama's policies was really about his race, they denied him the opportunity to have his ideas seriously considered and debated on their merits. In doing so, they trivialized the policies they supposedly supported, since any serious idea is going to generate a significant amount of opposition.
Obama suffered "your policies are crap" hatred that sometimes extended to him personally, much as Bill Clinton did in his first term, before he "triangulated" and basically adopted the GOP's platform to steal their thunder and get re-elected. Obama's been a tyrant from the beginning... nothing has changed. It's just that now people are beginning to realize it.
It's funny that the same people who excoriated Bush 43 (and rightly so) for his support of the PATRIOT act are silent now that Obama's administration (the NSA being part of the executive branch) is actually doing the things that they were concerned that Bush COULD do (but never did).
"Obama's been a tyrant from the beginning... nothing has changed."
I think you don't know what the word 'tyrant' means. But if you are talking about for example, executive orders, you are pretty much wrong. Actually, let me rephrase: you are absolutely wrong, completely and utterly wrong. Obama has issued the lowest number of executive orders per year of office since Grover Cleveland. In fact, in the modern age, Jimmy Carter is the most tyrannical of US presidents, by this measurement.
So, since you cannot mean giving executive orders, please explain what about Obama's term in office you would declare as 'tyrannical'. And you should explain how it is personally his fault, and not the responsibility of the (Republican) Houses of Congress as well.
Source: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
And those of us who predicted this from the very start were (and are still frequently) dismissed and disparaged as ignorant racists. On the one hand I could take solace knowing that they will and do suffer as much as I. On the other hand I am unhappy that any of us must suffer at all.
Oh fuck no only Sanders could ever make Hillery look like a sane human being. If that nut actually had a chance in hell of winning (Thankfully he does NOT). Not only would I want to leave the USoA. Like so many a Celbutard al-la a Trump victory. But, also the Earth. Sanders could not lead Picnick Ants to the Park on a warm sunny day much less a Nation like the US. Dreamy new age millennials need to wake the hell up. They arn't ever gonna get to go to Uni, in the US, at the expense of the Taxpayers Dime. No matter how many times he makes that promise.
> They arn't ever gonna get to go to Uni, in the US, at the expense of the Taxpayers Dime. No matter how many times he makes that promise.
Yes, there are many reasonable laws/policies/... that are unlikely to be ever implemented in the US. The list is in fact so long that I do not want where to start... Your point?
So if it's not Hillary or Sanders. Trump for President!
Or hey, start a revolution and put the power truly in the people hands as was intended by the founding fathers by decentralising government power to individuals and make governments mere admin staff in *our* great country.
"Not only would I want to leave the USoA. Like so many a Celbutard al-la a Trump victory. But, also the Earth."
You'd have to leave the planet, as (a) other countries are not obliged to take you in and (b) they've all got evil socialist things like universal healthcare, and we know how much you hate that.
So how is that universal healthcare you got in Britain? Everyone getting prompt quality care when they need it? I'd like to think so, but I keep seeing scary reports involving doctors being run ragged, half the population opting to pay extra for private care, hospitals caught in big scandals over patients left to die for lack of space, etc, etc. It's a bit disconcerting when the whole idea was to do it better than capitalism could.