Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jun 2013 22:33 UTC
Apple Official Apple statement on PRISM and privacy: "Regardless of the circumstances, our Legal team conducts an evaluation of each request and, only if appropriate, we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities. In fact, from time to time when we see inconsistencies or inaccuracies in a request, we will refuse to fulfill it." This is basically Apple re-publishing their earlier statement in a more official manner. You either believe it, or you don't.
Thread beginning with comment 564952
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
majipoor
Member since:
2009-01-22

"maybe now they no what it's like for the rest of the world, and why people hate amercia"

Because intelligence agencies in the rest of the world are not interested in spying people, right?

Getting as much info as possible is more or less the job of any such agency: the NSA is probably more efficient and has more money to spend than many, but it doesn't change the base concept.

Now, as a world citizen, one can try to fight data collection by intelligence agencies, but please, don't be naive or hypocrite: all this PRISM thing is neither new nor unexpected.

The only difference between the NSA or CIA and the Mossad or the Ministry of State Security or any other major intelligence agency is that public opinion could actually impact what US agencies are doing.

So you hate US because it is the only "big" country giving enough freedom to freely talk about such issue.

And I am not a US citizen, BTW: I am from Switzerland and I am sure the swiss Federal Intelligence Service is inefficient enough to know almost nothing about everybody ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

So you hate US because it is the only "big" country giving enough freedom to freely talk about such issue.

Excuse me dear Sir, are you sure people are THAT free to talk about everything ? Unions are barely legal over there, and if freedom of speech was THAT prevalent for the so-called democracy, WikiLeaks would have had no reasons to even exists and Ralph Nader would be President.

And I am not a US citizen, BTW: I am from Switzerland and I am sure the swiss Federal Intelligence Service is inefficient enough to know almost nothing about everybody ;)

Yet, while the SFIS is inefficient, you were not struck by planes in buildings. And the supposed effective intelligence, while being aware, had done nothing (for still unknown and unclear reasons).

This is just pragmatic ascertainments. Nothing against the US. But the US believes the whole world is against them and are on their defensive stance.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 5

majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

"But the US believes the whole world is against them and are on their defensive stance."

Which is basically the same for all big countries, especially from the point of view of intelligence agencies because, well, it is their job to be paranoid. And as you said it yourself, the planes did strike US, not Switzerland: US may have at least some good reasons to be paranoid.

I do not support them: it is just something obvious to me and I think people who are surprised by PRISM or whatever "scandal" are either naive or hypocrite. And I have a problem with hypocrites ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

brostenen Member since:
2007-01-16

Shure, just draw the "planes struck highrise buildings"-card. (yet again)...

Sorry... That was so last decade. I feel sorry for those who have lost relatives that day. Anyway...

If you really want to be a succesfull terrorist, then dont fucking attack United States of America. (wich obviously is no country, but an republic to clear that up).
If you attack USA, you get one hell of a bull-dog on you'r ass. So those terrorists have been without brain.

To be a succesful terrorist today, you attack a small pro-us state, and then you use words to scare the living crap out of american citizen's. That way, you avoid getting the big system on you'r back.

To say in another way... Terrorists have, with success, created a paranoid system that spies on native citizen's.

And to wrap it up. It appears that the 9/11-card is valid in an argument yet again. Depending on how you see and how you turn the question.

Reply Parent Score: 1

ndrw Member since:
2009-06-30

If it is so obvious then why a couple years ago people talking about mass surveillance were called conspiracy theorists? Why the person revealing such well known facts is labeled a traitor? Why other governments are either demanding explanations or using the fact as an excuse to tighten their own surveillance? What differs NSA from Stasi?

It is not normal that the government is indiscriminately spying on citizens. Every single country that implemented such a system became a tyranny. If not immediately, then after several elections.

Back to the article - these disclaimers are *not* about PRISM. They are about a well known legal process of collecting information. Google has been disclosing information about such requests for years now. The whole point of PRISM was that it did not need such a process and it was (still is?) classified - the companies are not allowed to mention it, just like they were not allowed to do it before.

Reply Parent Score: 4