Albus,
et al, let me very politely now "punch a very pragmatic hole in" this sort of argument:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sanjay-sanghoee/what-apple-is-missing-abo_b_6689470.html?utm_hp_ref=technology&ir=Technology:
there's also a problem with [Apple CEO Tim Cook's] view: namely, it ignores a basic truth about the threat faced by Americans today.
A new report on cyber security showing that since 2013, hackers have infiltrated more than 100 banks in 30 countries and stolen more than $1 billion, not to mention the many large data breaches which occurred in 2014, illustrate just how serious and widespread the problem of cyber crime is. Whether it's money or sensitive personal data, we are extremely vulnerable to hackers. In the computer age, all our information is stored electronically somewhere and that leaves us exposed even offline.
In this environment, and what Cook seems unable or unwilling to recognize, is that privacy and security are inextricably linked. You can't have the former without the latter, and just because Apple won't reveal information to the government doesn't mean that information could never be hacked by criminals. Let's not forget that our biggest banks and retailers also promised us protection, but were unable to provide it.
[...]
We are no longer dealing with innocuous teenage hackers like the one portrayed in War Games, but sophisticated criminal networks often sponsored by rouge nations. As a result, we don't just need individual company safeguards but system-wide ones to protect us properly, and that requires cooperation.
|
In short, the
vox populi is no longer willing to accept our proferred arguments ... that we
are, in fact, able to "protect our own perimeters." Regardless of what sort of
technological protections we might promote in our public arguments, the very-obvious
fact remains that these protections are not doing any good ... and that the only plausible reason for this outcome must
not be "simply a matter of ones and zeros."
The legislative outcome of this
status quo is, in fact, very easy to anticipate: "software engineering is about to be
[compelled, kicking and screaming, to become ...] a
profession." It will no longer be sufficient to say that "[we] promised us protection," based on
non-human (technological ...) considerations, because it is now quite obvious
(a) that "those promises meant nothing,"
a-n-d (b) that the plain-as-day reason for these failures is "the human factor."
So far, legislation has focused upon "protected industries." Publicly-traded companies
(Sarbanes-Oxeley), and Healthcare
(HIPAA). But the now-obvious reality is that "
every industry must be 'protected,' if it involves a digital computer."