Actually Ken, it does not depend on the circumstances. What the government wants both erodes liberty and security. Your hypothetical scenario is one where you argue the erosion of security can be beneficial in a specific circumstance, but you've still sacrificed the liberty and privacy of everybody in the process.
As to your second example, I do not find your own inability to manage basic computer security to be a compelling argument in favour of sacrificing my own security. This is also an inapplicable scenario as you can reset your password through Apple. What is at issue here is the ability to brute force attack an iPhone, not voluntarily reset its password.
CHL- you're still trying to play along with the government argument that is is a one use, one issue case when the facts say otherwise. The FBI especially has been working for a while to undermine all security by demanding backdoors. The more appropriate way to frame your analogy is that the government wants a master key to be created for it to use on any Bramah lock. And you're just supposed to trust them both that they (1) won't abuse the master key and (2) won't lose control of it.
I think we both know how unlikely both of those scenarios are.
|