Source
r/AdamCarolla•
b-nut

Adam's argument on Apple vs. FBI

After listening to Reasonable Doubt, does anyone understand Adam's stance on this topic? He's basically saying "The government is already balls deep, so what does this matter?". Geragos then goes on to say "Our house is our kingdom, and our phone is an extension of that.". Adam's response is that because of all the building permits, our house isn't even really "our" kingdom.

I don't understand the logic here. Should we also let the government record audio for every phone call? I mean, they're already balls deep, so why not?

Posted Feb 28, 2016, 11:20 PM UTC

626
honeybadger1984•

Adam is neither a scholar nor a technological philosopher. I wouldn't trust his opinions on free speech issues either. We should stop taking any of it seriously and just listen to the show for fun.

Apple is right in that once their encryption is compromised, any government agency can crack the iPhone wide open and spy on anyone. You can't give the government an inch, because they'll take a mile. If this truly were a one time thing, this wouldn't be that big of a fight.

15
111UKD111•

Adam uses that type of argument frequently and it doesn't make sense: We already have too much X, so what's the harm in having more X?

8
Manning01•

Which is the same defeatist attitude he preaches against with his argument against the lottery.

3
ColinOnReddit•

Except that's not his point. He also wants the big picture taken care of ideally. It's a fault of working big to small--sometimes, the big things are too far gone.

0
lopsiness•

I assumed after the whole mugs fiasco that all the big things were taken care of.

1
j3w•

This case itself is an example of why the government shouldn't be trusted. They cherry picked this one, terrible case to leverage public opinion into their fight for backdoor access to all electronic devices. If they are acting so deviously now, how noble will they be once they get the key to every phone in the country?

This begs a second question: it's 2016 and the sun has fully risen on the information age. Should we, as citizens, have the right to keep our information completely private behind unbreakable encryption? The precedent exists in some forms: you cannot legally compel someone's spouse to testify against them nor can you compel someone's lawyer to testify against them, so for legal purposes these relationships are unbreakable.

2
Reisz618•

I don't think Carolla will ever understand technology enough to understand why this is a big deal.

2
Grit-N-Motor•

His building permit argument was a weak example since it only applies to people who are actually building.

1
joshuads•

Not 100% true, since they could do the same sort of thing under condemnation proceedings, child safety issues, etc.

But to your point, they cannot come in and hammer at the walls to see if the wiring behind the wall is correct. There is some limit, but generally if they can manufacture a way to inspect, they can get into whatever they want.

1
Grit-N-Motor•

I hear ya!

1
Aeroflight•

The thing that drove me nuts was Gary insisting he could unlock it in "3 hours". No you can't, you armchair computer twit. Not any of the latest models, including the shooter's. It may be possible, but not by you.

Garagos gets a pass because he's not a tech guy, but a case that happened 6 years ago on a phone that's 6 years old or older IS a completely different animal than a modern phone.

1
b-nutOP•

Yeah that bugged me a little too. Gary is "the tech guy" in the carolla bubble, and he at least usually steers Adams rants in the right direction when it involves technology, but he's just wrong. "It might take me a while, but I can get in". BULLSHIT

1
HockeyandMath•

His 'given a number' argument could not be more short sighted. That number seperates you from the illegals. It opens your life up to the amenities of the state. There is no personal information to gain from logging you as a number.

I laugh as he talks about taxes because without them he would assuredly been hit over the head with a rock by now.

0
[deleted]•

[removed]

-1
archobler•

It's not a phone. It's a computer.

4
reallynette•

Thats true...and? Whats in the computer they dont already know? If we dont know, why the fuck do we have this place? (safe for work..utah nsa building)

https://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/

-1
archobler•

I'm saying your analogy was retarded (unless all you do is order pizza on your computer).

My phone has voicemails, emails, private texts, financial information, information about my business, sexy pictures that were sent to me, etc.

If you're suggesting they "already know' all this stuff, then why would they be begging Apple to give them access? Use your head.

4
Reisz618•

I had someone make that argument to me the other day, basically indicating that Apple had already done it and we were all stupid to think otherwise. There's no explaining "locked down" to some people.

1
JoePal88•

Am I missing something here? The 4th amendment has always applied, until a judge says "yeah, that guy is up to something. Go toss his place." That's when it's perfectly legal to search someones personal shit.

This guy is a straight up terrorist. The FBI isn't asking them to write new code for every iPhone. They just want help to get in this specific iPhone. Whats the problem?

-7
zero3_book•

http://www.ibtimes.com/apple-asks-why-hasnt-fbi-asked-nsa-break-iphone-encryption-2325047

Apple is being told that they have to come up with a program for breaking iPhone encryption/security.

The FBI is presenting this to the media and the public as though they just need help with this one specific phone for this one specific case, but that's definitely not true, since a precedent would be set, and other agencies are already asking for the same thing.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/fbi-fighting-apple-over-more-just-one-phone

8
111UKD111•

Since every iphone (of each model) is identical, there is no way to only get into a single phone without making a way into every phone. If Apple creates a way into every phone they stand to lose a lot of ground to competitors outside the US who don't build their phones with faulty security.

4
roadblocked•

The best argument I've heard is that if a safe manufacturer makes an uncrackable safe, the government can't force the safe manufacturer to create a key to get into every model of that safe, and that safe manufacturer is also under no obligation to crack its own safe, warrant or not.

Sometimes the contents of a phone contain more valuable personal information that what could ever be contained in a physical safe.

2
ddiiggss•

Asking them to create software that would break encryption for all phones is exactly what they're being asked to do.

1
b-nutOP•

Your argument at least makes sense. My critique is really about the way Adam went about arguing that they should have access.

0
heperd•

Why do you expect Adam to know anything about any topic that requires reading more than 2 sentences? Give up the notion that he is informed about anything he talks about. He is a comedian.

9
JaquesNoir•

Too many half tards forget that Adam is a comedian, not a philosopher. Further, there is no way (or need) for the US gov't to record and analyze every second on your day via iPhone, most of us aren't that important and never will be.

1