President Obama Hints At Asking Silicon Valley To Magically Block Terrorists From Using Tech Products
from the not-good dept
As you probably know, last night President Obama gave a big address from the Oval Office about what he plans to do about ISIS, along with dealing with the threat of lone wolf and other attacks at home. Buried deep within (in fact, I missed it the first time through) was a nod towards the idea of pushing Silicon Valley to magically undermine encryption. Here’s the entirety of what he said on the subject:
I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.
That seems like a simple sentence, but it’s loaded with meaning, and most of it’s not good. As we’ve noted over and over again, the last refuge of those looking to undermine encryption is to bring up the idea of “if only Silicon Valley techies and law enforcement could get together, surely they could come up with some magic golden key. But that’s clueless, because what they’re asking for is impossible. This isn’t something that’s “difficult” — it’s impossible. You can’t make a backdoored encryption system that doesn’t make everyone vulnerable and less safe.
And, yes, while you can say he doesn’t specifically say “encryption” here, the use of the phrase “technology to escape from justice” clearly implies encryption. Of course, as we’ve noted time and time again, the hand-wringing over encryption is totally overblown. Every time we look at terrorist attacks, they seem to do plenty of planning out in the open. And, even when encryption is used, law enforcement and the intelligence community have admitted that either the people often mess up, making them trackable, or they leave other trails.
Besides, what changes does President Obama think technology needs to stop a husband and wife from plotting at home to shoot up an office holiday party?
The whole thing is ridiculous — and perhaps the only redeeming thing is that he didn’t say he was going to ask Congress for a law on this, but rather just put pressure on US tech companies. Unfortunately, as we’ve seen in the past, sometimes that pressure can be intense and almost impossible to refuse. The President’s statement today just undermined a whole bunch of the US tech industry’s claims towards keeping information private. He just handed a gift to foreign companies.
Filed Under: encryption, going dark, gun control, isis, president obama, terrorists
Comments on “President Obama Hints At Asking Silicon Valley To Magically Block Terrorists From Using Tech Products”
"Thank you Mr. President" -Every criminal and terrorist out there
The President’s statement today just undermined a whole bunch of the US tech industry’s claims towards keeping information private. He just handed a gift to foreign companies.
Calls for destroying encryption don’t just help foreign companies who might actually care if their product is secure, it’s a major boon to criminals of all stripes, who have got to be salivating at the idea of so much poorly protected, and highly valuable information available to them, courtesy of the government.
technology to escape from justice
Also technology that is useful to escape from justice:
Telephones
Motors
Weapons
Zippers & buttons (in clothes)
admittedly, if terrorists cannot use technology, they would be very very easy to spot.
BTW. “Escape from” is not “evade”, “escape from” actually includes being caught first.
Re: technology to escape from justice
“admittedly, if terrorists cannot use technology, they would be very very easy to spot.”
Or they’re Amish.
Re: Re: technology to escape from justice
…”admittedly, if terrorists cannot use technology, they would be very very easy to spot.”
Or they’re Amish…
Or they’ve used the Amish as an example of not trusting technology. Even before the internet came of age any use of mail or phones was only to set up meetings; the plans and instructions were given face to face. Even today the smart ones only use email and cel phones to set up meetings, and normally using innocent messages that are intended to confuse any outsider that might be listening. The important instructions are still delivered “face to face” and not Facebook.
Re: Re: technology to escape from justice
May I point out that Amish do use technology? (e.g. the horse collar is also a bit of technology.) They just choose to use certain types of technology to a certain extent.
The Amish are pretty safe if terrorists were not to use even flint axe-level tech.
Re: technology to escape from justice
You forgot the MOST useful things to escape from justice: lawyers and money. But of course, that would mean targeting the largest groups that makes up politicians today, so of course they’ll never be on the list.
He’s in ingnorant company. France is contemplating blocking TOR…
Re: Re:
‘Never let a good tragedy go to waste; corpses are only as useful as the personal power you can wring from them.’
-Unofficial motto of politicians everywhere.
I urge our government leaders to make it harder to use their brains in the pursuit of justice.
Oh, wait.
Re: Re:
Sooooo...
Do I have this straight?
Technology is this wicked, demonic thing used primarily by criminals to commit all sorts of foul and terrible acts and needs to be carefully regulated, controlled, limited and broken.
Guns are cute, cuddly toys that everyone should have and are at best only peripherally involved in crime.
right?
Re: Sooooo...
so you think GUNS ARE NOT TECHNOLOGY?
I would say there is a HUGE technological jump from a club to a gun
Re: Sooooo...
No, guns are also terrible. In fact, yesterday I watched a pistol walk into an animal shelter and kick puppies for 45 minutes, accompanied by a black forestock grip. It only ended when a federal law entered the room and told the gun it wasn’t allowed to be there, at which point the gun promptly apologized and turned itself in to the authorities.
The black forestock grip fled the scene and is still at large.
Re: Re: Sooooo...
Soooo… we need a law banning all black forestock grip’s?!! ON IT!!!
-Politician
The next logical step would be to quad-amputate everyone because they could all be suspected terrorists, and terrorists also use their arms and legs to destroy the country and kill people.
Re: Re:
please remember logic does not apply after 9/11…
specially in governments.
Re: Re:
next logical step would be to quad-amputate everyone because they could all be suspected terrorists
I see they are stealing policy ideas from IS/Saudi Arabia.
Techno Illiteracy or Totalitarianism?
Either way, #MyStupidGovernment is again showing off it’s disinterest in respecting US citizen’s constitutional rights. Watch them turn up the FUD volume to 11…
Re: Techno Illiteracy or Totalitarianism?
I think it’s already gone past 11…
Re: Techno Illiteracy or Totalitarianism?
you mean showing off interest in accomplishing surveillance state, police state and world order a.s.a.p.???
Boy, you really don’t want to have to use a foreign VPN to steal all your entertainment, eh?
Genius and Nobel Peace Prize
is not the ONLY WAY to escape from justice,
to NOT USE technology???
Denial
The Right is in denial about the issue of firearm control vis a vis terrorism
The Left is in denial about the role played by Islam in terrorism.
So they agree to gang up on the tech sector as being the ones who need to change.
Re: Denial
YES, let’s all get in DENIAL about the freedom axis
there is only a left right dychotomy
https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
Re: Re: Denial
Actually even the political compass you quote is an oversimplification (Although it is a good start). In reality you require more than two dimensions AND a more complicated topological connectivity. (Almost all extremes tend to lead towards authoritarianism – even if you don’t start in that direction.)
Re: Denial
“The Right is in denial about the issue of firearm control vis a vis terrorism”
Yes, because law is how you prevent people from committing mass murder.
California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation and yet people, intent on mass murder, still purchased fire arms. No firearm control law stops those intent on committing harm from doing so. No criminal/terrorist would hesitate to break the law acquiring weapons if they intend mass murder. The reason firearm control laws are demanded each time is the same reason encryption back doors and surveillance is demanded, control.
Constitutional Rights don’t make you safe. Constitutional Rights make you free.
Re: Re: Denial
California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation and yet people, intent on mass murder, still purchased fire arms.
The USA has a range of gun control laws that range from lax to very lax by European standards. Calling the California laws “strict” looks like a joke from where I’m sitting.
Terrorists will still try to commit mass murder whatever you do but without legally available guns it will be harder for them – and they may have to resort to less effective (knives) or less reliable methods (bombs).
Why make it easy for them???
You are in denial.
Re: Re: Re: Denial
oh YES it is unbelievable hard to get guns in BORDERFREE Europe,
Jesus Christ
and NOBODY has guns like in the US, specially in Switzerland!
Re: Re: Re:2 Denial
BORDERFREE Europe,…and NOBODY has guns like in the US, specially in Switzerland!
European gun laws are generally stricter than the US – however as you point out – in the Schengen zone you effectively have the law of the laxest country everywhere. (Also true with states/ state borders in the US.
Your example of Switzerland is a bad one because:
1) Switzerland isn’t even in the EU let alone Schengen.
2) Switzerland does have very high gun death rates relative to its overall crime level.
The UK on the other hand – where borders are more strongly policed and gun laws are the strictest anywhere – has a gun death rate 1/10th of Switzerland and 1/40th of the USA.
Re: Re: Re:3 Denial
somehow you forgot to compare
the citizen voting rights
and the government- to- citizen fscking
Re: Re: Re: Denial
If guns were as easy to get in Europe as they are in the US we might see mass killing in Paris!
Oh, wait.
Re: Re: Re:2 Denial
yes and people could drive through many borders and many countries with a van full of kalashnikovs…
like through Germany and into France…
Re: Re: Re:3 Denial
You are right that the weak borders reduce the effect ogf gun control.
I suppose I was really talking about the UK where both gun control and borders are stronger than in France.
Re: Re: Re:4 Denial
I’m thinking that being an island helps out big time with the borders thing…
Re: Re: Re:5 Denial
Then perhaps you can explain The Troubles in Ireland?
Re: Re: Re:6 Denial
Isn’t that all about Refugee’s? We’ve got over 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. That’s almost twice the entire population of Ireland.
Keep grasping….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_population_analysis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States
Re: Re: Re:6 Denial
Then perhaps you can explain The Troubles in Ireland?
Ireland is separate Island from Great Britain – and that certainly helped to reduce the impact of the troubles.
The troubles are long gone now and guns were never quite the issue anyway.
N. Ireland has laxer gun laws than the rest of the UK so is not relevant to this discussion.
Basically the UK has very strict firearms control and consequent extremely low (and actually falling) gun homicide rates.
Gun control works here and has saved lives.
Re: Re: Re:7 Denial
“Gun control works here and has saved lives”
oh YES the UK prison is an example for the planet to follow
Re: Re: Re:8 Denial
Some people willingly give up their freedom for security. If that is what they chose to do, then more power to them. In the U.S., the job of the police is to arrest people that break the law, not protect it’s citizens. There are several court decisions that support that statement, below is a link to one. So it is up to me to protect myself and my family, and as France has shown us, simply having strict gun laws is not enough to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, so giving up mine is out of the question.
Perhaps it’s different in the U.K. Their geography, (Island) combined with their Orwellian style of government, allows them to protect the people while simultaneously removing their freedoms. If that is what they chose to do, then good for them, it is their choice. We on the other hand, had forefathers that had the forethought to write it into our constitution so those freedoms will never be taken away from the people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect-someone.html?_r=0
Re: Re: Re:9 Denial
Perhaps it’s different in the U.K. Their geography, (Island) combined with their Orwellian style of government, allows them to protect the people while simultaneously removing their freedoms. If that is what they chose to do, then good for them, it is their choice. We on the other hand, had forefathers that had the forethought to write it into our constitution so those freedoms will never be taken away from the people.
Our government is no worse than yours in general – and in many ways it is often better. Only lack of knowledge could lead you to that accusation.
Your forefathers had the stupidity not to realise that times would change and allowing everyone to arm themselves would in the end just result in more death – often accidental.
Plus you don’t really follow the 2nd amendment anyway because not ALL types of weapons are allowed.
Plus – your law enforcement is more aggressive and extreme than ours. Reading all the articles about police brutality and asset seizure in the US and comparing it with the UK where these things are somewhere on the spectrum between rare and unknown has convinced me of that.
Plus many of the worse cases of injustice in the UK in frecent years have occurred at the instigation of US corporations or the US government.
Re: Re: Re:10 Denial
“Our government is no worse than yours in general – and in many ways it is often better. Only lack of knowledge could lead you to that accusation.”
Matter of opinion. You have the government you deserve, as do we. I have the freedom to go buy a gun, you do not. You can’t stand that, I really do understand why you can’t stand that, I just don’t agree with you.
“Your forefathers had the stupidity not to realise that times would change and allowing everyone to arm themselves would in the end just result in more death – often accidental.”
Now your just being childish. Just because our society is different, doesn’t mean the people that created it are “stupid”. Or are you saying that you know better than the people that created our country what is best for us? Hubris much?
“Plus – your law enforcement is more aggressive and extreme than ours. Reading all the articles about police brutality and asset seizure in the US and comparing it with the UK where these things are somewhere on the spectrum between rare and unknown has convinced me of that. “
What the fuck does that have to do with anything? We have unsecured borders, a well armed populace, and a good portion of us have have a case of the “Don’t give a fucks”. Of course our police are aggressive and can get out of control. That’s why we have to reign them in on occasion. Yet another price of freedom we have to pay.
“Plus many of the worse cases of injustice in the UK in frecent years have occurred at the instigation of US corporations or the US government.”
Don’t go blaming us for your problems. You take care of your country, I’ll take care of mine. Fix your own house before you worry about mine.
Richard. It’s obvious you don’t give two fucks for our freedoms. You have given yours up for security, that is your right. Good for you, more power to you. Our forefathers made sure it would be damn near impossible for our government to take ours. Yes we have death’s from guns. We have accidents, murders, robberies, gun crimes of all kinds. But we also have the ability to stand up in armed protest if required to secure our freedoms and put an out of control government back in check. Anyone that says “you have guns, they have drones” is an idiot, we have more civilian guns in this country than people, that will and does give pause to our government.
With great freedom comes great risk and responsibility, and unfortunately sometimes blood. Freedoms are not easy nor are they safe. They are dangerous and sometimes uncomfortable things that have to be fought for and paid for, sometimes with life.. even innocent life. For whatever reason, you can’t stand that. But that’s ok. I invite you to stay on your island, and worry about your own.
Re: Re: Re:6 Denial
American funding.
Re: Re: Re: Denial
Are these the same gun laws that prevented the terror attack in France?
Re: Re: Re:2 Denial
Are these the same gun laws that prevented the terror attack in France?
No – they are the ones that have prevented attacks using guns in the UK.
Note that in the UK the attackers have had to make do with knives – so fewer deaths.
France is part of Schengen – so French laws don’t prevent gun leakage fromother countries where laws are laxer.
Re: Re: Re:3 Denial
oh YES,
the million-cameras orwellian UK is the example to follow, specially because it is an ISLAND with NO BORDERS
Re: Re: Re:4 Denial
yeah When Trump wins he’s gonna hire a bunch of Mexicans and Canadians to dig moats.
Re: Re: Re:4 Denial
“oh YES,
the million-cameras orwellian UK is the example to follow, specially because it is an ISLAND with NO BORDERS”
Island, or prison?
Re: Re: Re:5 Denial
both?
Re: Re: Re:6 Denial
or prison?
Sorry – it is no worse than the US in those respects and at least our “prison guards” aka police don’t shoot us at random quite so often.
Re: Re: Re:7 Denial
“Sorry – it is no worse than the US in those respects and at least our “prison guards” aka police don’t shoot us at random quite so often”
wow, you are not a SHEEP
Re: Re: Re:7 Denial
Again. You chose to give up your freedom for security. That is your choice. Not going to happen here. Not with thousands of miles of unsecured border and a supreme court who rules that the job of police is to arrest “alleged” lawbreakers, not protect it’s citizens.
Two different cultures, two entirely different points of view. You see your country as “safe”, we see it as a “prison”. Freedom is dangerous, it comes with a price. We are prepared to pay the price, your not. Apples and oranges.
Re: Re: Re:8 Denial
You chose to give up your freedom for security.
Whereas you sacrificed security for freedom – and then gave up on the freedom anyway!
Plus – the freedom to shoot (or be shot by) my neighbour is not one I’m very keen on!
Re: Re: Re:9 Denial
“Whereas you sacrificed security for freedom”
Now your getting it Richard! Security doesn’t mean shit without freedom.
“and then gave up on the freedom anyway!”
I can run down to a gun shop right down the road and buy a gun right now, can you? I would say I still have that freedom!
“Plus – the freedom to shoot (or be shot by) my neighbour is not one I’m very keen on!”
And now we are at the root of the problem. Richard your not scared of the guns, your scared of the freedom.(Unless of course your just a coward, and if that’s the case I guess I’m wasting my breath, but I’m going to assume that’s not the case.)
Re: Re: Re:10 Denial
Hoo boy! If guns = freedom please explain mass surveillance, asset forfeiture, and constitution-free zones. The answer I usually get is that the important rights yet remain.
Which means that as long as you’ve got guns, you don’t give a rat’s about anything else.
I’d like to see what you and your gun could do about TSA molestation at the airport.
Guns are a fetish, a charm like a lucky rabbit’s foot. They’re not doing much to secure your rights at all.
Re: Re: Re: Denial
“Terrorists will still try to commit mass murder whatever you do but without legally available guns it will be harder for them – and they may have to resort to less effective (knives) or less reliable methods (bombs).”
You think someone who wants to kill a bunch of people is going to say. “Oh, we can’t use guns, it is too hard to get legal ones and illegal ones will make us criminals.”
DeNile is the longest road.
Re: Re: Re:2 Denial
No, they’ll find other, easier, less immediately traceable things to kill people with.
“I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.”
while at the same time I will send TOW missiles (Tube launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided), and Toyotas with machine gun turrets to ISIS so that they can use tech to escape from justice,
and why not send some high tech guns to mexico drug gangs, too
Justice? Your justice? Where’s the justice in undermining the US Constitution at every opertunity? Where’s the justice in spying on millions of American citizens? Where’s the justice in torturing people, hiding it and then ignoring accountability once it’s in the open? Where’s the justice in law enforcement murdering people and getting away without punishment? Where’s the justice in plea bargain strongarm tactics? Where’s the justice, Obama? You speak of justice, yet your house is out of control with injustice. Fix YOUR house before telling others to fix theirs.
Re: Re:
It would help to get the link of how Obama defines JUSTICE™.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s classified I’m afraid, and merely asking has resulted in you being placed on several watchlists for your very unamerican thinking. -The USG
Re: Re: Re: Re:
my school library reading list is enough to put me on the list
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I do not know why books are still allowed these days…
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Even the DoJ is afraid of librarians. Not only do they read books, but surrounded by all those stacks of paper books, they’ll survive nuclear war.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
the time machine
the invisible man
animal farm
1984
brave new world
fahrenheit 411
island of doctor moreau
Re: Re:
Ditto of post 15!
Of course he is really after just furthering the police state. At the rate we are going, it will be possible to stop a husband and wife secretly plotting w/in their own home.
couldn’t he just ask for winged unicorns? and world justice?
that would be much faster
Re: Re:
More realistic, and safer for the public too.
“I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice. “
who the fsck are the “high tech” leaders and why the fsck would they listen to Obama if THEY are LEADERS?
Is he talking about the Forbes top 20 ?
cause they do own his ass,
don`t they?
“I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice. “
what the fsck are the “law enforcement leaders”?
the cop who issued the most parking tickets last month?
or the one who shot most dogs last year?
And in France, they want (and most likely plan) to block public WiFi and ban Tor.
Re: Re:
Germany has never allowed public Wifi
Re: Re: Re:
NEVER,
france wants to ban it “during a state of emergency”
Re: Re: Re: Re:
In order to increase the panic level?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
excuse me, why is the wifi not working?
-because we are on state on emergency, would you like some cookies with your latte?
yes, please and another banana ice-cream
Re: Re: Re:
[citation needed]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
citations? you are welcome.
http://www.dw.com/en/criticism-for-draft-german-wi-fi-law-seeking-more-connectivity/a-18718789
or just google: germany public wifi
“I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice. “
iphone 7 will include a “soul tenderness sensor”
and will graduate the size of the backdoors accordingly,
samples with a broken sensor will be gold coated and flashed with custom firmware and screen savers for the “elite only” limited version
Ridiculous techno-babble emanates from multiple orifices throughout society, film at eleven.
“I will urge gun makers and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use bullets to mass murder innocent people.”
I think we should backdoor bullets so that they can’t be used by nefarious criminals to kill innocent people.
And no, I don’t accept your claims that such thing is impossible and that it would also enable criminals to use such backdoors.
It’s for the children, for our freedom and for our safety. Even if it looks like I’m curtailing your freedom and diminishing your safety. That’s speech from hipsters and terrorists.
Re: Re:
“…hipsters and terrorists.”
whot? I though Obama-likes are hip?!?!
I have to re-arrange my facebook then
Re: Re:
This. This is the real answer. It would be easier to make bullets that refuse to puncture “innocent” people than it would be to make safely backdoored encryption.
Re: Re: Re:
and winged unicorns ?
wouldn`t THAT be easier?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only if they also include a R2 unit for self repairs and astrogation.
When is that bastard mother fucker Obama and the rest of the Democrats going to get it? Encryption does not encourage gun violence or terrorism. The fact is, if our fucking law enforcement would do its damn job and conduct background checks like they are supposed to and close loopholes that allow mentally unstable people to purchase guns, then there wouldn’t be any gun violence.
Obama’s speech wasn’t about gun violence, he’s using these latest incidence of gun violence to jump on the ‘don’t do encryption’ bandwagon. Democrats have become a national security risk to the welfare of this country.
How is it that Democrats keep calling for more gun control laws but won’t advocate or call for our law enforcement to enforce the laws that we already have. All we keep getting are new laws that nobody enforces.
Re: Re:
Dude, don’t try to make this a partisan issue. The Republicans are just as stupid as the Democrats.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s only because both team pepsi and team coke peg the stupidity meter. If we were to fund research into constructing a new stupidity meter with substantially greater range, it might be possible to tell the difference between the two sides.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
No wait. Could it be? Let me think. It might be. It could be. They are! They are The Pepsi Generation(™)!
Re: Re: Re:
why not? false dichotomy and Hegelian Dialectics have worked for thousands of years with the sheeple
“I don’t have a proposal myself, but rather I’m just trying to “start a conversation” on this.
American ingenuity is great, so I don’t really believe all these computer science experts who say that it’s “too hard” to make a soul tenderness sensor and an instantaneous world peace app.
A whole lot of good people have said it’s too hard … maybe that’s so…. But my reaction to that is: I’m not sure they’ve really tried.
Maybe the scientists are right. But, I’m not willing to give up on that yet.”
Sweet Baby Jesus
Sweet baby Jesus, make it stop!
Roll it back to zero
The number of days since the government came up with a new scheme to outlaw encryption.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton
released a statement along the same lines, supposedly asking people in Silicon Valley to help the government in fighting terrorism and asking them to take seriously the concerns of those in power with regard to encryption. With all that we’ve seen the government do to hamper civil liberties (in this regard at least), how again are we supposed to take such calls seriously?
Re: Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton
you mean Hillary
“I do my own sh!t on my own email server” and
“I erase my own email server”
… Clinton ?
Re: Re: Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton
Don’t forget, it was SOP during the W years for government officials to use email supplied by the RNC for government work for exactly the same reasons. So if the Republicans are stupid enough to make email a big issue during the general election, it will come back to haunt the entire party.
Says a man that avoids the use of technology to escape from the law and justice.
Re: Re:
well we have to admit he does do kill via DRONES,
and that is kind of technological?
Re: Re: Re:
Well, HE doesn’t, but he’s got people who will do that FOR him. That makes it okay, right?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
he is not like bragging about it
and scaring the jonas brothers and sh!t
is he?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
death threats to minors
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
and peace prize
Snowden's NSA blowback
Perhaps if the NSA had not been caught illegally violating everyone’s privacy by harvesting and storing all communications –and reading all unencrypted communications at will– then the rush for widespread encryption tools (by the law-abiding and law-breakers alike) might never have happened.
Re:
It was all LEGAL™ ; the of DOJs definition of LEGAL™ remains classified.
Game over!
Does that mean that nobody should deliver hard disks to the NSA data processing center in Utah? Because make no mistake, the capacities planned there are far outside the specs needed for constitutional activities.
How is Congress going to communicate without telephones?
Obama asks facebook
to give more facebook- likes to himself
and to remove facebook- likes from the trrrist
“In coming days, the White House will talk to companies in the tech sector about developing a “clearer understanding of when we believe social media is being used actively and operationally to promote terrorism”
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-california-shooting-cyber-obama-idUSKBN0TQ04J20151207
One of Clarke’s laws states
I think this is important because these leaders keep demanding magic from technology because they cannot distinguish it from each other.
Re: Re:
He also had a lesser-known one that stated
Re: Re: Re:
Hey now, cabbages are actually useful, no need to compare them to politicians, that’s unfair to the cabbages.
Re: Re: Re: Politicians & Cabbages
Whether you have a politician or a cabbage the end result is always the same – hot air.
Re: Re: Re:2 Politicians & Cabbages
You mean flatulence, not hot air. 😉
Obama says whatever people want to hear. I don’t trust a word out of his lying mouth until it takes form in action.
Obama’s idea of making our online security more secure is to disable our online encryption? Democrats are the best example of how bad ideas can corrupt a society.
Obama’s speech was never about gun violence, he just used the recent violence in San Bernardino to headbutt Silicon Valley into halting their plans for stronger encryption in technology.
Silicon Valley is gonna bow down to Obama.
Yeah, right! Obama has as much chance at convincing Silicon Valley as we have of the sky falling down on our heads. Obama is a first class, world class, MORON.
Re: Re:
“Obama… , Democrats are the best example of how bad ideas can corrupt a society”
governments of the whole planet are colluding into banning encryption, but somehow you sheeple still think there is something like OPPOSING political parties in the US? REALLY?
you think OBAMA is something more than a speech reading actress?
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, I do. He’s a reasonably good speaker so it is sufficient to handle him at bullet point, excuse me, hand him the bullet points. As opposed to his predecessor, you can let him talk freely for minutes on end without him coming off as an utter and clueless idiot.
He is not too stupid but too unprincipled to be more than a sock puppet.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
his improvisation skills have improved…
nonetheless there are plenty of videos where his brain just freezes under teleprompter malfunctions
thanks!
from all us hgackers we endorse th epresident …no really we do…its akin to a biker wanting pot illegal……
As a lot of people point out, most tools can be used for both legal and illegal activities. Given this, and the ubiquity of technology, it seems like the only way for a government to prevent ‘abuse’ of technology would be to have every single system and device be capable of judging whether or not the particular person is allowed to perform a particular task legally. Since this couldn’t realistically be done locally on every device, they’d all have to report all activity/identity pairs to a government-controlled evaluation system capable of making a judgement based on the law (and reporting all ‘denied’ requests to the authorities, of course). Man, I can’t wait for that Internet of Things.
Please choose one
1. Secure against hackers and also law enforcement and the government.
2. Open to law enforcement, the government’s of US, China, Russia, and Anonymous, and hackers.
“I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.”
FFS, people the statement is NOT about terrorists, it is about Hollywood and the recording industry. It is about supporting existing monopolies (duoplolies) and assisting them in making everyone overpay for entertainment. And until the technology industry bribes,,, er ‘lobbies’ more than the entertainment industry it will continue to be about that.
Re: Re:
oh YES,
governments of the whole planet are colluding into banning encryption…
because mp3 royalties!!!
Re: Re: Re:
No, the reason is terrorism!
Terrorists don’t kill people, encryption kills people.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
governments and the religion of authority
kill millions
they call it democide
“But that’s clueless, because what they’re asking for is impossible.”
Could we possibly stop calling them clueless? It implies the people calling for golden keys to back doors in encryption are simply ignorant and not too bright. That if only someone could sit them down and explain it so that they understood, they’d realize it couldn’t be done and would stop asking for it.
The word you want is duplicitous. Most of the people calling for these things are smart people who damn well know what they’re asking for is impossible. If they didn’t already know that themselves, they have staff plenty capable of explaining that to them. They just don’t care. Want they want isn’t magic encryption that the bad guys can’t use, or that only the good guy can break and the encryption is psychically capable of telling which is which. What they want is to be able to continue spying on their own citizens electronically. They don’t care that it would open the average citizen up to greater risk. They just want their minions to continue to be able to violate their citizen’s privacy at will.
“They just want their minions to continue to be able to violate their citizen’s privacy at will.”
excellent!
but as far as I understand THEY THEMSELVES ARE MINIONS, too
Crooks and good looks
This guy is really, really stupid, but he speaks well.
Quite eloquent considering this is coming from a backdoor man.
“The whole thing is ridiculous — and perhaps the only redeeming thing is that he didn’t say he was going to ask Congress for a law on this, but rather just put pressure on US tech companies. Unfortunately, as we’ve seen in the past, sometimes that pressure can be intense and almost impossible to refuse.”
Because it is a far lot easier to threaten and bully tech companies to do your bidding then it is to get the law changed that will do just the job.
Once everyone is a terrorist, no one is a terrorist.
The Nobel War Criminal in Chief Believes in Unicorns
I will urge high tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.
Do you mean escape from justice like US politicians escape war crime and torture tribunals?
Or
Do you mean escape from justice like US banksters did while committing massive control fraud that cost the US trillions of dollars?
This is easy
People are making a big deal of this, but it’s actually rather easy to do.
[ ] I am over 18 years of age or I am under 18 years of age and have my parent/guardian’s permission; and,
[ ] I am not a terrorist
That would work well.