Direct Quote Analysis

The way the world is surrounded by technology, not being able to understand technology is difficult but not “death in life”. Today, almost anything on paper is easily accessed on a laptop or smartphone. However, if you're technologically illiterate, you still have access to everything on paper, you just may have to look harder for it. In the text, Carole says “Now I can read, I can read books, anything. I can write. In English and French.” When I read that quote, I think of Carole's troubles when learning to read on paper, now she has to learn all over again on a laptop. Personally, I find it very hard to read off of a smartboard or laptop and I can only think of the struggles coming Carole's way in the 21st century. Some challenges could be,

The events of the San Bernardino shooting were a tragedy. 14 people were killed, and another 22 were injured when a married terrorist couple staged an attack on a Christmas party. This was an unmitigated catastrophe, but it spawned one of the most important security debates in recent memory. The FBI wanted to unlock one of the suspects phones, but were unable to do so because of security measures on the phone. The FBI wanted to brute force the password lock on the iPhone, but device would wipe itself after 10 failed attempts to unlock the iPhone. Thus, the FBI asked Apple to create an intentionally insecure iOS update, specifically for this iPhone, in order to bypass the security restrictions. Apple disagreed with the FBI, and tried to avoid helping the FBI in such a way, arguing it would undermine the purpose of security itself. Overall, Apple has the best argument, both legally and as a matter of public policy.

Subsequently, I think Apple should try and use the patch method to unlock the iPhone for several reasons, instead of not unlocking it at all. The iPhone's owner is a gunman, a shooter, and it would seem quite wrong to not unlock it to figure out anything, like who was this person, what are his plans, what made him like this. Technically, Apple has the right to refuse to unlock the iPhone, but we need to solve this issue, and protect ourselves from future terrorists to use iPhones. There is another problem, and it is that if Apple decides to work with the FBI to break the laws just to break into their own iPhones, other foreign governments can use Apple to break into iPhones from owners that don’t live in the US. This means that Apple will have to work more with others and give up time to use the iPhone. I think Apple should have some time to unlock the iPhone just for the FBI so they can have access to the terrorist’s plans. Terrorism in the US is a very critical problem and is very serious and Apple will need to solve the way to unlock the iPhone without giving up privacy and security to the FBI. Apple will need to find a way to make the iPhone unlock without the FBI knowing how to and other foreign governments also. If Apple does not succeed to unlock the iPhone, or gives up both privacy and security, then having an iPhone really looks like there is no specialty or difference between Android phones. If Apple decides to unlock the iPhone just for the FBI, this

The purpose of this quote is to foreshadow what the crime does to the community and how the death of four lives not only ruins the lives of the murderers but also the townspeople. Holcomb was described in the previous paragraphs as a peaceful place where nothing bad could have ever happened. However, the author uses phases such as “lock their doors” to portray how Holcomb and the people that live there had their lives change drastically. Capote also uses the phrase “and as strangers” to show how a very close community transforms into a town where no one feels safe and secure. The effectiveness of this quote comes from how Capote describes the townspeople and what affect it has on their everyday lifestyles.

Apple shouldn’t have the ability to access user’s phones because of the invasion of privacy, the limitations & precautions that would be created for the user, and the sense of embarrassment to have complete strangers being able to view all your personal information. Apples terms and agreements are unfair to users because you don’t have no ultimatum especially when it comes too updating your phone they have access to your apps , pictures and other private things that you really can’t deny. Other invaders can’t access but apple People’s distress over the privacy of their communications has never been smaller. Whether the

First off, I really liked your response due to the fact that I also addressed this question, and I was able to gain a different insight from your discussion board on things I did not include in my response. For instance, the way you explained how first point of view gave strength to the overall idea of history brining pride to many Chicanos not only showed great analysis, but also supported your argument regarding the character’s strong identification with his culture. You use a quote to support your answer and further analyze the quote and speak about the effect cultural heritage and history has on the person Joaquin is.

In recent years Apple has come under fire over their company’s views on the security and values that they hold. Apple is very focused on their customer base, they pride themselves on having a great security software program that is harder to hack, and software that protects their customers from invasion of privacy. December 2,2015 in San Bernardino, California a terrorist attack was made against innocent civilians. 14 innocent lives were taken in this attack; the terrorist were found to be using Apple’s IPhone. In New York, a high level drug dealer was busted, he was using an IPhone and claim he forgot his password. Apple has since then come under scrutiny from the Federal government to assist them, while many of their customers are backing

Eventually the court ordered for it to happened, but the Apple kept its same stance. The feud between corporations and a government is a human issue that pertains to anyone who values privacy and inalienable rights. Many argue that giving up privacy for secret is not worth it. After Brussel Attacks, citizens are angry that they are given up privacy, but their governments have not been successful in combating terrorism.These initiative are a direct violation to the Fourth Amendment which states “Right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, hall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause” In order to search a person there has to a probable cause to do so. The Federal government is violating this statement by invading privacy. I began to do research on the topic, and found an interesting video where an adjacent professor at Seton Hall Law, Judge Andrew Napolitano, the Fourth Amendment was created to “protect the quintessential American right of the right to be left alone”. By the FBI intervening with the software, it goes against constitutional, privacy and human rights. All the spying has been unsuccessful, because the United States continue to have attacks on the homeland. A Recent example would be the Boston Marathon bombing where hundreds were injured after the fatality. Additionally, according to a recent report from a digital analytics firm comScore reveals that of the 184 million Americans owning a smartphone, more than 4 in 10 use and iPhone. For this reason, this issue pertains to all of us. This is an issue who should concern anyone with a cell phone, laptop and etc. To a certain extent I agree with Edward Snowden that the American people should be allowed to decide whether or not they approve of these government actions. Apple should preserve our

After Farook and Malik were killed following their crimes, an intense legal battle broke out between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Apple. The FBI wanted the technology giant to unlock Farook’s iPhone, believing that it might contain vital information related to why he and his wife committed the act of major terrorism. Apple refused, realizing that doing so would violate the safety and privacy of their millions of customers. The situation only got more serious when a federal magistrate ordered Apple to unlock the iPhone. Interestingly, there were many cases to similar to this in the past, but none achieved near as much notoriety as this had at its climax. Part of that is because it also involves terrorism; many hope that it also

Terrorism is a deadly act that is becoming more consistent by the day and it needs to be stopped . When recovering the phone of a terrorist the FBI discovered that the phone had vital information on it but was protected by an encryption. The FBI then asked the company Apple to create a program to help decrypt the phone. But Apple is refusing.

“Fourteen people were slaughtered and many more had their lives and bodies ruined. We [the FBI] owe them a thorough and professional investigation under law” (Comey). The death’s the FBI Director is referring to were a result of a terrorist attack on the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health in California. In an effort to complete a exhaustive investigation, the FBI is tirelessly working to unlock the iPhone of one of the perpetrators, Syed Rizwan Farook. Unfortunately, the FBI has hit a roadblock in the San Bernardino investigation: the San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone is impossible to unlock. How can the FBI in good conscience close an

The case of Apple Vs FBI is basically the FBI trying to have Apple change their operating system (OS) in their phones so they can be encrypted if they need to be. Currently, Apple phones are set up to protect against hacking. The FBI wants to gain this access so they can stop a terrorist from being able to use mobile technology as means of harm and to gain knowledge of what the attack could be.

While I understand privacy issues, these are known terrorists and that precludes any right to privacy. If there is information in the phone that could prevent more attacks and Apple does nothing, not sure how they will like blood on their hands and how many people will wait in line for their next version of the iphone .... OPEN THE PHONE

Apple has tipped the scale of technological innovations; however, they have gone too far. I do not support Apple’s adoption of their IOS 8 encryption to prevent law enforcement access to user’s information. Terrorist attacks rates have increased in 2015 compared to previous years. The United States and various foreign countries are fighting against a new terror organization called ISIS. ISIS is an Islamic terrorist organization which has made alleges to kill thousands of individuals worldwide, however primarily individual’s in the United States. News outlet such as FOX 5 and ABC news report on, ISIS threats and attacks on a weekly basis from tragedy stories to information regarding the organization’s development. In the article by David Sanger, the director of the FBI, James Comedy, said “What concerns me about this is companies marketing something expressly to allow people to hold themselves beyond the law. Terrorists will figure this out,” along with savvy criminals and paranoid dictators” (Sanger, 2014). Terrorist groups would be able to use Apple encryption to their advantage. Terrorist can use Apple’s IOS 8 to communicate among various devices that support IOS 8. Law enforcement officials would be unable to monitor or legally obtain these devices with a court order to prevent any potential attacks. For example, the recent terrorist attack against Paris is believed the terrorist “used the Sony PlayStation 4 to recruit for and plan the attacks. The report suggests that

The company on the forefront of this issue is Apple. After the tragic events in San Bernardino, CA on December 2, 2015, the United States FBI located an iPhone 5C belonging to one of the terrorists. The FBI, however, was unable to access the phone and formally requested Apple to unlock the device to facilitate the search for information about the killers. Apple swiftly refused and after several weeks of back and forth, the FBI filed a case against Apple (Nakashima April 2016). This case