Skip to main content

Does BlackBerry bypass the NSA?

That's what I am thinking after reading this ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/technology/13rim.html?hpw

I mean, the U.S. govt. is probably able to crack any encrypted communication it wants to ...

And the movie Enemy of the State would have us believe that the telecommunications companies are hand in glove with the govt. And of course there are laws in the U.S. too that require companies to provide access to the govt. when the govt. wants to tap into any particular individual's account.

As long as that's all done in a supervised fashion ... legal warrants and all ... I think that's okay in these days of terrorism.

Comments

  1. opitAugust 22, 2010 at 8:06 PM

    "o.k. in these days of terrorism"
    Oh, all rightee, then!
    I guess you missed the part where the 'terrorists' are those without nukes and/or 'conventional forces' to repel invaders. Or the part where the Resistance magically becomes the Insurgency when foreign forces comment on their occupation and uprooting of what was local government.
    Perhaps the part where the F.B.I. issues tens of thousands of letters annually allowing them to inspect electronic records without Due Process - systemic and systematic abuse - is also Jolly Good.
    http://www.aclu.org/national-security/report-fbi-abuse-national-security-letters
    This from the people who also
    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20100818/twl-secret-cia-interrogation-tapes-found-41f21e0.html
    I'll leave you to your cheery world of fatuous irrelevancies.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Feel free to weigh in with your thoughts ...

Popular posts from this blog

Longforms and 'Best of 2017' Lists and Favorite Books by Ashutosh Joglekar and Scott Aaronson

Ashutosh Joglekar's books list. http://wavefunction.fieldofscience.com/2018/03/30-favorite-books.html Scott Aaronson' list https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3679 https://www.wired.com/story/most-read-wired-magazine-stories-2017/ https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/12/the-best-books-we-read-in-2017/548912/ https://longreads.com/2017/12/21/longreads-best-of-2017-essays/ https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/21/world/asia/how-the-rohingya-escaped.html https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-journalists-covered-rise-mussolini-hitler-180961407/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/artificial-intelligence-future-scenarios-180968403/ https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/01/20/citizen-kay https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/where-we-are-hunt-cancer-vaccine-180968391/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/dna-based-attack-against-cancer-may-work-180968407/ https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/22/dona...
1 comment
FULL ARTICLE

Why Do We Have A Name?

Humans across religious, cultural and national differences all have names. At least all modern humans have this. I wonder if the lost tribes in the Amazon jungle or the tribes who live in the Nicobar Islands cut off from civilization since the last many thousands of years have a similar naming convention as the rest of us humans do. And we humans often choose to have system of naming that consists of a first name and a last name. the last name often indicates a person’s or a family’s occupation and remains the same from generation to generation. All the offspring of one family get the same last name as the parents — usually the last name of the father. In some cultures, the first names can be the same as that of the father too. In some cultures, the name of the village, and other names too get added to the child’s name and it grows rather long. But consider for a moment how it all would have started and taken hold among humans in deep antiquity. Humans would have acquired...
Post a Comment
FULL ARTICLE

Ayn Rand Was Right

Do we exalt the John Galts and Howard Roarks among us or despise them? Do we admire the ultimate, self-centered and selfish capitalists or the selfless, self-sacrificing altruists? Oh sure there are the Martin Luther King, Jr.s and Mahatma Gandhis and Nelson Mandelas and Aung Sun Suu Kyis we like to point to as icons and worthy role models for our children. But look deeply and we find that we are obsessed with the wealthy. And who are the wealthy? Why do we let the Robert Rubins, Sandy Weills, Jakc Welchs, Jamie Dimons and their Wall St. brethren keep their millions? Because we consider that right and their right. Let alone the hedge fund people whose entire purpose is to become billionaires. How many people explicitly make life choices that will lead to a life of service -> not be a charlatan like Mother Teresa but just helping the underprivileged without trying to 'achieve' greatness by so doing. So Lance Armstrong and Greg Mortensen and the Evangelical Christ...
Post a Comment
FULL ARTICLE