320
UK wants to weasel out of demand for Apple encryption back door (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -24 points 1 year ago (1 child)

These things you write, they are not in any way substantiation of the claim that Apple doesn't make backdoors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's because it's categorically impossible to prove a negative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    In theory you can learn mind reading from some fantasy universe and check every Apple person. Or ask a crystal ball. Or use some other way to collect full information about our universe, check every rabbit hole, so to say, and then confidently confirm "there's no Apple backdoor here". "Here" meaning this plane of existence.

    In practice yes.

    EDIT: Forgot - the "refused to cooperate" and "they have disagreements" things even in daily wisdom don't change the probability of Apple having made backdoors. It's PR. You most likely won't learn it from the news if they do, in fact, cooperate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Even in your made up scenario it doesn't prove the negative. Maybe your mind reading didn't work because Apple has a mind wiping device that made them forget. Maybe the crystal ball didn't work because Apple made an even more powerful "crystal ball blocking" device. You can't prove that's not what's really happening.

    So no, you in fact can't prove a negative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm not claiming they don't. I'm pointing out the absurdity of calling somebody out for not doing the impossible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I didn't say "prove", I used another word with bigger allowance. Of "likely backdoors vs likely not" kind. I wanted to say that their "public" conflicts with governments and their statements of the "trust us, we won't sell you" kind are all worth nothing, because being caught lying won't cost them anything.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •