Skip to main content

Messages from The San Bernardino Shooters

The FBI has now announced, and announced, and announced they may have a way to access the encrypted iPhone messages of the San Bernardino shooters, without the help of Apple.  Who cares?

Mostly Apple customers.  Apple has a totally vested interest in maintaining security for their would-be customers. Help the FBI, and you help yourself out of business.  But then come some cryptic announcement from Johns Hopkins that they can penetrate encrypted graphics.  According to the Washington Post, a team of researchers led by Johns Hopkins University computer scientist Matthew Green has poked a hole in Apple's iMessage encryption software.  The FBI now claims it may no longer needs the help of Apple.


Fantastic.  Decrypting images is somewhat different, but entirely similar, to decrypting messages, but the cat is out of the bag.  This tacitly makes it OK to for Apple to help the government.  And maybe they have done just that with a clever cover provided by an external agent. 

What a wonderful world!  The one (Apple)  stands the high moral ground against the evil interloper (FBI).  The third party (WHOMEVER) arrives in the nick of time to say we can do it.  The first is off the hook, the evil interloper gets the info, and morality, business, and justice are preserved.

What do you believe?
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03
Post a Comment
Read more

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of
Post a Comment
Read more

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view
Post a Comment
Read more