Friday Morning: Far Over Yonder

It was rough road this week, but we made it to Friday again for more jazz. Today’s genre is ska jazz, which will feel like an old friend to many of you.

The artist Tommy McCook was one of the earliest artists in this genre. Just listen to his work and you’ll understand why he has had such a deep and long-lasting influence on contemporary Jamaican music.

Let’s get cooking.

Apple pan dowdy

  • Need a hashtag for NotAlliPhones after FBI says hack only works on “narrow slice” (Reuters) — The method offered by a third party to open San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone 5c won’t work on later phones like the iPhone 5s in the Brooklyn case, according to FBI director Jim Comey. While it may be assumed newer technology is the barrier, this could be a simple line in the sand drawn by the FBI so as to limit potential risk.
  • Yet another pearl-clutching essay asking us if Apple went too far protecting privacy (MIT Technology Review) — This is the second such POS in this outlet in the last couple of months. Oh, by all means, let’s risk exposing hundreds of millions of iOS users to any surveillance because law enforcement needs access to the kind of information they didn’t have 20 years ago.
  • Apple has complied with government requests to crack iPhones 70 times, beginning in 2008 (Mac Rumors) — The first request, believed to have occurred while George Bush was still in office, arose from a child abuse and pornography case. In a case like this where children may have been endangered, one can understand the impetus for the request. But maybe, just maybe, Apple was so firm about the San Bernardino iPhone 5c is that Apple knows the government has gone too far after nearly eight years of compliance.
  • And for a change of pace, a recipe for Apple Pan Dowdy. Don’t fret over the pastry flour; just use all-purpose and not bread flour.

Leftovers

  • Yahoo up for bids, Verizon interested (Reuters) — The same telecom once in trouble for using persistent cookies is interested in a search engine-portal business which may offer them access to non-Verizon customers. Plan ahead for the next level of consumer tracking if Verizon’s bid wins. Bidding deadline has been extended from April 11 to the 18th.
  • Households at bottom income levels can’t afford food, housing (Vox) — Can’t understand why the rise of angry white man candidates? This is one big reason — things are getting much worse for those who can afford it least. And nobody working in Capitol Hill or the White House seems to give a rat’s whisker.
  • Banksters blame Hollywood for lack of interest in dodgy subprime automotive bonds (Indiewire) — Investment banking firm Morgan Stanley credits the film The Big Short, based on Michael Lewis’ book about the 2000s housing bubble and the subprime mortgage crisis, with spooking investors away from subprime automotive bonds. By all means, let’s not look in the mirror, banksters, or at the inability of working poor to make ends meet, increasing likely uptick in automotive loan defaults.
  • Venezuela makes every Friday a holiday (Bloomberg)

    — The deep El Nino cycle caused drought conditions, substantively lowering reservoir levels. President Maduro is asking large customers to make their electricity in addition to declaring every Friday for the next two months a work holiday to conserve energy. Clearly Venezuela needed investment in solar energy before this El Nino began.

  • Researchers found people do stupid stuff when they find a flash drive (Naked Security) — After sprinkling a campus with prepared USB flash drives, a study found nearly half the people who found them plugged them into a computer, ostensibly to find the owner. DON’T DO IT. If you find one, destroy it. If you lost one, consider it a lost cause — and before you lose one, make sure you’ve encrypted it just in case somebody is stupid enough to try and find the owner/look at the contents.

HIGHLY EDITORIAL COMMENT: Bill, STFU.
Just because a single African American author called you “The First Black President” doesn’t mean you are literally a black man (and the label wasn’t meant as a compliment). Your massive white/male/former-elected privilege is getting in the way of listening to people you helped marginalize. You cannot fake feeling their pain or triangulate this away. Just shut up and listen, if for no other reason than you’re hurting your wife yet again. (Sorry, I had to get that off my chest. This opinion may differ from those of other contributors at this site. YMMV.)

Phew. Hope you have a quiet, calm weekend planned. We could use one. See you Monday morning!

Blogger since 2002, political activist since 2003, geek since birth. Opinions informed by mixed-race, multi-ethnic, cis-female condition, further shaped by kind friends of all persuasions. Sci-tech frenemy, wannabe artist, decent cook, determined author, successful troublemaker. Mother of invention and two excessively smart-assed young adult kids. Attended School of Hard Knocks; Rather Unfortunate Smallish Private Business School in Midwest; Affordable Mid-State Community College w/evening classes. Self-employed at Tiny Consulting Business; previously at Large-ish Chemical Company with HQ in Midwest in multiple marginalizing corporate drone roles, and at Rather Big IT Service Provider as a project manager, preceded by a motley assortment of gigs before the gig economy was a thing. Blogging experience includes a personal blog at the original blogs.salon.com, managing editor for a state-based news site, and a stint at Firedoglake before landing here at emptywheel as technology’s less-virginal-but-still-accursed Cassandra.
41 replies
  1. PeasantParty says:

    Remind me why Verizon fought to break up the Ma Bell system. How did they do that? Oh! Monopoly was the excuse.

    • bloopie2 says:

      Most industries in the US seem to end up with three major players. More than that is not profitable enough, fewer is bad for the consumer. Ma Bell was one, too powerful; when broken up it was way more than three–too many. Now there’s four– yellow, red, blue, and magenta. That trend is more powerful than any of us.

  2. bevin says:

    bit=but

    Here is the quote:

    ‘Here’s the story. I have been mayor for eight years, Congressman for sixteen, a US Senator for nine years. Do you know how many times people in the media have said: “Bernie, what are you going to do to end poverty in America? This is an outrage! We have 47 million people in poverty, what are you going to do about it, Bernie?” The answer is zero. Not once.’

  3. Bardi says:

    STFU Bill! Exactly.

    Also, the fainting couch, once again, for a “technology” publication (MIT Technology Review) that seems more interested in politics.

  4. P J Evans says:

    Yeah, I had that reaction to Bill and his remarks also. He’s going to be a First Guy who needs to be kept out of the spotlight and away from mikes and cameras.

  5. orionATL says:

    “… Just because a single African American author called you “The First Black President” doesn’t mean you are literally a black man (and the label wasn’t meant as a compliment). Your massive white/male/former-elected privilege is getting in the way of listening to people you helped marginalize. You cannot fake feeling their pain or triangulate this away. Just shut up and listen, if for no other reason than you’re hurting your wife yet again. (Sorry, I had to get that off my chest. This opinion may differ from those of other contributors at this site. YMMV.)… ”

    1 – let’s understand this “black lives matter” political theatre in philadelphia for what it was – an effort by sanders’ supporters to undermine secretary clinton’s support among black voters. no one should be foolish enough to call this april 7 activity by any other name, given that sen sanders is badly lagging sec clinton and needing to diminish clinton’s support among black voters in the immediately upcoming new york (april 19), pennysylvania, and maryland primaries.

    2 – black lives matter is supposedly a non-partisan group focused on police brutality, especially summary executions by police. how is it they have become partisan players in the dem presidential race? how is that likely to help their movement?

    3 – if congressional votes taken 20-30 years ago matter a great deal for the future (i don’t think they do), how is it black lives matter is not visiting with sen sanders who voted for the crime bill.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/02/12/1994-crime-bill-haunts-clinton-and-sanders-as-criminal-justice-reform-rises-to-top-in-democratic-contest/

    4 – there are few things more pointless and vindictive in politics than fighting for the future while looking backwards 22 years. in 1994 the crime bill was viewed as a positive step by the white power structure. in addition to criminalization, the bill provided billions of dollars for community development in an effort at crime prevention. with 22 years of hindsight, however, it is no longer viewed positively by the white power structure for two specific reasons – mandatory sentencing and severer criminalization of lesser crimes. today congress is working on ameliorating the severe injustices of mandatory sentencing.

    5 – we read these days that the hell of black neighborhoods involves gun deaths – often not even with crimes, just gun deaths. wer they were forward-looking rather than political actors, b. l. m. would be talking with sanders and clinton about gun control.

    hindsight is perfect, and a perfect political weapon to use, if one has little of his own to contribute to the future, as is the case with sen sanders on “criminal” matters as well as “poverty” matters.

    • orionATL says:

      do you understand, rayne, that many, many members of the black community regard both clintons with trust and affection?

      the blindness of “righteous progessives” on this matter is revealing.

    • bevin says:

      “.. black lives matter is supposedly a non-partisan group focused on police brutality, especially summary executions by police. how is it they have become partisan players in the dem presidential race? how is that likely to help their movement?”

      I imagine that it is related to the DLC record of militarising the cops and whitewashing police excesses. Mayor Rahm Emanuel, for example, has endorsed Clinton- that makes guilt by association fair. Sanders thanked Emanuel for not endorsing him.

      ” in 1994 the crime bill was viewed as a positive step by the white power structure.”
      No comment

      “..today congress is working on ameliorating the severe injustices of mandatory sentencing.”
      I hope that nobody is holding his breath.

  6. lefty665 says:

    Hillary would be well advised to STFU too. She can ensure that the rest of the Dem primaries focus on what kind of untrustworthy, mendacious twit she is. With a majority of the country already in that camp, the pissing contest she and Bill are engaging in spreads those opinions and worsens the disaster she would be as the candidate. She should be taking the high road and having a communal love fest of ideas and visions with Bernie. But she does not appear to believe in those ideals and is clearly ripped that her coronation is not coming off as planned. Perhaps her slogan should become “A progressive who gets things dumb”.
    .
    “do you understand, rayne, that many, many members of the black community regard both clintons with trust and affection?”
    Goes to show that some black folks can be fooled too. Others are out ragging the honky to his face. Bernie was getting arrested as part of the civil rights movement in Chicago while a couple of miles away Hillary was frolicing as a Goldwater Girl. As a right wing, DLC, neocon she has changed party label but not much else. Expect she liked Goldwater’s votes against civil rights legislation at the time. Ever notice that all the Goldwater Girls were white?

  7. Rayne says:

    orionATL (2:20) — Before I go any further, I have to ask you: are you white and male? Because if you are, your privilege skews your perception. You can even be fairly woke and you are still going to have deeply embedded biases because you don’t have to worry about driving while brown or leaving the house while female.

    And I’ll share here that I am mixed-race female. I pass as white, which means white people say and do some ugly shit in front of me, thinking I’m one of their fellow white peeps. Like telling me really nasty Asian jokes to my face, unaware that my father is half-Chinese. And I know that I have faced only a fraction of the racism most persons of color (POC) face because I pass as white. That said…

    1) The reference to “black lives matter” political theatre — lower-case scare quoted with the use of the word “theatre,” indicates
    a) a lack of understanding and/or respect for the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, and
    b) you think it’s just a show. That’s before we get into whether this was Sanders supporters or not. You’ve exposed your bias.

    2) It doesn’t even matter whether I point out that BLM has attempted to confront every candidate because this is an existential crisis for POC in America. (Philadelphia was just the latest effort.) Your bias has already prevented you from seeing BLM’s repeated attempts to confront the other candidates about racism and police abuse in the U.S.

    3) Sanders has been confronted by BLM — it’s taken since last summer when BLM confronted Sanders at Netroots Nation for Sanders to arrive at the position in this video on police reform. That’s the whole point of confrontation, to make the case for change. In spite of the same confrontations with all the other candidates — and if you actually make an effort to look you’ll find them — none of them have been persuaded to acknowledge a problem with police brutality and racism in policing which needs to be changed with the exception of Sanders. It’s one thing to make a bad decision; it’s quite another to double-down when a decade-plus of data tell reasonably intelligent people that decision was mortally wrong. That’s what Bill Clinton is doing.

    4) And you’re full of shit about “pointless and vindictive in politics than fighting for the future while looking backwards 22 years.” Why are you even here at this site, then?

    • We’re still fighting about an illegal war and the expansion of panopticonic surveillance spawned in 2001 — looking backwards 15 years.
    • We’re still fighting about excessive powers reserved by the executive office — 43 years and beyond, and within the last 16 years including Cheney’s Energy Task Force overreach.
    • We’re still fighting about civil rights which have been denied since 1964 — 52 years.
    • We’re still fighting about equality denied since this nation was founded — 240 years.
    • And we continue to fight to preserve this democratic republic based on a rejection of unilateral monarchical powers denying fundamental rights to self-determination for that same 240 years.

    A true progressive march into the future requires knowing what must be left behind to avoid its duplication.

    What utter pap to claim Congress “is working on ameliorating the severe injustices of mandatory sentencing.” You know what would do that immediately? Legalize marijuana AND pardon any sentences issued for possession, use, and distribution of marijuana. But that’s not going to happen because this mostly white/male Congress is comfortable doing nothing.

    5) Discussions by/about BLM and gun control are chronically derailed by candidate’s supporters who are gun freaks resistant to any gun control when they aren’t derailed by the GOP and the NRA.

    And your bias is revealed once again referring to the “hell of black neighborhoods involves gun deaths,” with the assumption the problem is just “black neighborhoods” (as if they’re someplace remote and foreign to you). No, the problem is a government which does not want to do anything to disturb the status quo — even the black man in the White House now is unwilling to do what needs to be done. Example:

    Gun control advocates and politicians frequently cite the statistic that more than 30 Americans are murdered with guns every day. What’s rarely mentioned is that roughly 15 of the 30 are black men.

    Avoiding that fact has consequences. Twenty years of government-funded research has shown there are several promising strategies to prevent murders of black men, including Ceasefire. They don’t require passing new gun laws, or an epic fight with the National Rifle Association. What they need — and often struggle to get — is political support and a bit of money.

    […]

    A week after McBride and the other faith leaders met with Biden, Obama announced his national gun violence agenda. He called for universal background checks, which experts say could prevent some shootings. Other key elements of his plan — a ban on assault weapons and funding to put police officers in schools — were unlikely to save a significant number of lives.

    Obama went over the litany of school shootings — Columbine, Virginia Tech, Newtown — and made a brief nod to the deaths of “kids on street corners in Chicago.”But his plan included no money for the urban violence strategies his Justice Department described as effective. His platform didn’t refer to them at all.

    [source: ProPublica]

    Get that? Roughly half of the gun deaths each day are black men — but nobody’s doing anything at all about the other half, either.

    This crap has been going on for far longer than 22 years, and the increased militarization of law enforcement since 2001 coupled with police brutality has done jack shit to change the statistics. It’s not going to end by ignoring the past as blithely as you are wont to do; it’s evidence of what has failed us, and it’s the benchmark against which we measure future efforts.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. — George Santayana

    Ugh. What a great fucking note on which to start my weekend. * click *

  8. Rayne says:

    orionATL (2:36) — This:

    do you understand, rayne, that many, many members of the black community regard both clintons with trust and affection?

    Yeah, as a matter of fact, I do. I have talked with many black community members about the Clintons over the last decade. And I also know many young black community members are NOT diehard automatic Clinton supporters. Older black women? Sure, just as many older white women are. But you need to take a good hard look at the massive age schism in the party. Hillary’s got her work cut out for her to persuade young voters to get out, no matter what color.

    Indeed, among Millennials Clinton loses the strong advantage among African-American voters generally that has helped her sweep Southern contests. Whites support Sanders by 54%-37%. Blacks support him by a bit more, 56%-37%, and Hispanics by nearly as wide a margin, 53%-40%.

    Only among Asian Americans does Clinton pull even, 46%-46%.

    [source: USAToday]

    Who do you think the Black Lives Matter movement is, after all?

    • orionATL says:

      rayne @ 4:03 pm

      why, rayne, how deeply, profoundly sexist of you, especially after your little intitial lecture on sexism and white males.

      the hidden message at 4:03pm is “clinton can’t do it. clinton can’t win because [certain classes of people] just don’t like her.” oh, really. a woman has to be liked rather than competent? i never felt that way, personally.

      so a woman who

      – was 4 times an active governor’s wife with four campaigns for her husband under her belt.

      – twice an active first lady with 2 active campaigns for her husband under her belt.

      – for 8 years a sen from new york.

      – ran her own year-long democratic presidential campaign

      – was secretary of state for 4 years

      – is managing for a second time her campaign for the dem9cratic nomination

      that highly competent women really isn’t competent enough to win because she isn’t well-liked enough?

      tell me more of your beliefs about sexism, rayne.

      on the surface you appear inconsisent, but i’m sure you can explain it all to your own satisfaction.

  9. omphaloscepsis says:

    Best bit in Spike Lee’s concert film, “The Original Kings of Comedy”, was Cedric the Entertainer on Bill. Punch line — “Clinton’s close.” Followed by several examples.

  10. orionATL says:

    rayne – “orionATL (2:20) — Before I go any further, I have to ask you: are you white and male? Because if you are, your privilege skews your perception. You can even be fairly woke and you are still going to have deeply embedded biases because you don’t have to worry about driving while brown or leaving the house while female…. ”

    rayne, that is sexist crap. you can forget uniformly applicable ” deeply embedded bias” stuff. what is true of a vast collectivity of white males is not necessarily true of any one. i am as capable of empathy for women as are you; the same goes for blacks.

    oh, and remember, rayne, it is the poor, downtrodden white male that is the focus of sen sanders’ months-long political drive, and also of the righteous progressives here. given you comment here, do you see the irony, rayne? personally, i have found this obsession with the welfare of white males peculiar and have said so. where have you entered your similar concerns?

    rayne – ” 1) The reference to “black lives matter” political theatre — lower-case scare quoted with the use of the word “theatre,” indicates
    a) a lack of understanding and/or respect for the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, and
    b) you think it’s just a show. That’s before we get into whether this was Sanders supporters or not. You’ve exposed your bias… ”

    that is a willfully ignorant or sloppy reading of my text, rayne. here is what i wrote with time of occurrence and circumstances clearly specified:

    orion – “… 1 – let’s understand this “black lives matter” political theatre in philadelphia for what it was – an effort by sanders’ supporters to undermine secretary clinton’s support among black voters. no one should be foolish enough to call this april 7 activity by any other name, given that sen sanders is badly lagging sec clinton and needing to diminish clinton’s support among black voters in the immediately upcoming new york (april 19), pennysylvania, and maryland primaries… ”

    there is no overall statement here at all on my part about the value of blm, certainly no negative one. in fact, i support their goals where it comes to police violence against blacks.

    the timing of the blm action in philadelphis is unambiguously partisan political and unambiguously aimed at sec clinton. i asked – why this attack at this time on clinton when sanders also supported the 1994 crime bill? (and incidentally, what would blm gain from it?)

    rayne – “2) It doesn’t even matter whether I point out that BLM has attempted to confront every candidate because this is an existential crisis for POC in America. (Philadelphia was just the latest effort.) Your bias has already prevented you from seeing BLM’s repeated attempts to confront the other candidates about racism and police abuse in the U.S… ”

    thanks for the lecture, but i am well aware of what blm has done in terms of confronting candidates. but this is in philadelphia in april 7 with and election on april 19, and it is NOT about police executions of blacks which is blm’s stated concern, but about a 22 yr old crime bill signed by sec clinton’s husband and voted for by her opponent sen sanders. sanders at netroots is not politically the same as bill clinton in philadelphia on april 7 before an april 26 primary vote.

    this is partisan politics pure and simple. if you can’t see that, that’s your problem.

    rayne – “What utter pap to claim Congress “is working on ameliorating the severe injustices of mandatory sentencing.” 

    you’re too well informed not to know what i am referring to – the major bipartisan effort in the congress with obama’s leadership. legislation will reduce sentences. legalizing marijuana nationally is not going to happen anywhere near as soon; legalization will occur slowly in a few states. even then, there are more poor of ALL colors who are not trapped by drug use but other minor crimes who need relief from long sentences. “pap” is a foolish appellation to apply to this effort. it is the best game in town now.

    rayne – “… 4) And you’re full of shit about “pointless and vindictive in politics than fighting for the future while looking backwards 22 years.” Why are you even here at this site, then?

    We’re still fighting about an illegal war and the expansion of panopticonic surveillance spawned in 2001 — looking backwards 15 years.

    We’re still fighting about excessive powers reserved by the executive office — 43 years and beyond, and within the last 16 years including Cheney’s Energy Task Force overreach.

    We’re still fighting about civil rights which have been denied since 1964 — 52 years.

    We’re still fighting about equality denied since this nation was founded — 240 years.

    And we continue to fight to preserve this democratic republic based on a rejection of unilateral monarchical powers denying fundamental rights to self-determination for that same 240 years… ”

    thanks for the sanctimonious, patronizing comment, but the fact is i’ve written more at this site on any one of these issues than you have. and i’d guess the analytical quality and passion of my writing at least equals yours.

    your modus operandi here has consistently been to stay technical and avoid controversy. that’s fine, but it does not put you in the first rank of caring posters or commenters.

    at the moment, rayne, your thinking/writing is not the acute thinking/writing i am accustomed to reading.

  11. orionATL says:

    rayne – “5) Discussions by/about BLM and gun control are chronically derailed by candidate’s supporters who are gun freaks resistant to any gun control when they aren’t derailed by the GOP and the NRA…”

    oh, dear. what must we do then? fold our tents? where are sen sanders’ bold comments and programs about, gun control – reallistically pistol, assault weapon, and ammo.

    you seem to be excusing both blm and sanders.

    in fact what you just did is completely duck the sanders/gun control issue. very sly of you, rayne, but not very admirable.

    rayne – “… And your bias is revealed once again referring to the “hell of black neighborhoods involves gun deaths,” with the assumption the problem is just “black neighborhoods” (as if they’re someplace remote and foreign to you)…”

    again, more bias crap from you – another willfully ignorant interpretation of what i wrote. there is no assumption whatsoever on my part of the problem being one in “just black neighborhoods”, but the problem sure as hell is in poor black neighborhoods. go look up the map of gun shootings and deaths in chicago in 2015. black neighborhoods are heavily involved and their inhabitants are terrified for their children and for themselves.

    again, rayne, your reasoning is not at the level i have come to expect from you.

  12. orionATL says:

    from rayne @4:03 pm –

    “… Who do you think the Black Lives Matter movement is, after all?… ”

    i don’t have to” think” rayne i know why. because blacks were getting shot by cops in astonishingly large number with little or no cause for the extra-judicial execution.

    but why the no-sequitur, rayne, between that final comment and the long quote and comments immediately above it about how unpopular clinton was with antone and everyone but her family members?

    • orionATL says:

      again, rayne,

      – about this paricularly contemptible “are you with us or against us, comrade” comment of yours at 3:50 pm:

      – [… 4) And you’re full of shit about “pointless and vindictive in politics than fighting for the future while looking backwards 22 years.” Why are you even here at this site, then?

      We’re still fighting about an illegal war and the expansion of panopticonic surveillance spawned in 2001 — looking backwards 15 years.We’re still fighting about excessive powers reserved by the executive office — 43 years and beyond, and within the last 16 years including Cheney’s Energy Task Force overreach.We’re still fighting about civil rights which have been denied since 1964 — 52 years.We’re still fighting about equality denied since this nation was founded — 240 years.And we continue to fight to preserve this democratic republic based on a rejection of unilateral monarchical powers denying fundamental rights to self-determination for that same 240 years….]

      and

      – about which of us reallly writes analytically and passionately about what blacks getting executed by cops,

      go searching for my long argument against the ferguson effect. it’s back a ways, several months probably. it was in response to “big scare” comey’s first use of the term. i doubt any other person posting or commenting here ever devoted the similar intellect or passion to that issue that i did.

      i demonstrated that “the ferguson effect” was probably a factual sham – a political contrivance by police unions to mitigate adverse press about vicious police behavior.

      i doubt a single principal here ever bothered to read a word of it – they seem too ego-involved sitting on the telephone wire, twitting and shitting with the rest of the pidgeons.

  13. orionATL says:

    finally, since you’re lecturing on sexism and racism, professor rayne,

    1. sen sanders only wins states with a very high percentage of white only voters – 80% or better.

    now why would that be the case? are whites just politically savier?

    2. sen sanders’ (along with his righteous progressive adherents) seem concerned only, or mostly, with the plight of lower and lower middle class white males

    now why would that be the case?

    3. white males taken as a group did not vote for clinton in 2008.

    white males taken as a group are not voting for clinton in 2016.

    now why would that be the case? are white males just politically savier?

  14. Ian says:

    Rayne said:
    Yet another pearl-clutching essay asking us if Apple went too far protecting privacy (MIT Technology Review)-This is the second such POS in this outlet in the last couple of months…….
    .
    and also highlighted:
    .
    (Mac Rumors said): Apple Complied With First iPhone Unlock Court Order in 2008, Says Report.
    .
    I SAY:
    Thank you, Rayne, for highlighting the recent press reports on the continuing “trench warfare” of Apple v the FBI/DOJ—
    —-with Apple, supporting its Marketing Dept’s explanations on the “privacy/security protection features” built into the latest version of the Apple OS in one trench or corner
    —-& the DOJ/FBI claiming to be worried about “going dark” & acting as the sole authority in defining “the [American] public’s interest” in the other trench or corner.
    .
    Contrary to Apple’s Marketing Dept claim, we have seen: a) the ACLU</a Technology Fellow Daniel Kahn Gillmor explain that iPhones don’t actually erase the data in the way,& at the speed, implied by Apple b)various ex-NSA employees argue that Apple’s claim of “impossible to access without our own skilled help” was, knowingly, just as wrong/inaccurate as the FBI’s own claim that they couldn’t access without Apple’s skilled help c) the specialist journal FORENSIC MAGAZINE was, concurrent with the Cellebrite disclosure, reporting a whole series of firms’ in the USA alone, with a substantial track record of “obtaining access” to Apple’s (& also to others) smartphone’s although they were not a “State-Actor”/National Intelligence Agency d) & finally we have seen the FBI itself agree that they had been able to access [the San Bernardino] smartphone “using an undisclosed third-party”.
    .
    The name the philosophers give to Apple’s claim, that they & they alone are entitled to determine what level of privacy/security, if any, they are required/allowed to claim & then as a different argument, the level of privacy/security they actually provide is known as “technological determinism” (I say I have invented a better mousetrap–& therefore anyone who suggests I am a liar,[it was NOT better than others] or who suggests I am a cruel & inhumane individual who will bring great distress to the cats of this world [because the mice have all disappeared] is to be demonized as evil, indeed unconstitutional). A warning about the dangers of such beliefs was carried by the Guardian shortly after the FBI made their announcement & can be seen here
    .
    In the world of the USA’s “High-Tech Industries” this website (emptywheel.net) has seen links to [British] press reports covering the quite public method the British Government uses to obtain sight of, and review the actual privacy/security provided by, the source code of [Chinese company’s] Huawei telecommunications & also Network products
    –& the Eagle Eye’s of emptywheel(Marcy) has noticed US Press references to a similar [though secret]
    US Government function
    .
    In keeping with the two different countries methods of running a foreign policy—London quite publicly saying it will act for the people of Britain’s advantage & demanding a copy of the source code from the company—Washington D.C. following the practices pioneered by the great segregationist President W.Wilson of self-congratulating himself & thus his successors for having created “ A shining City on a Hill, a Defender of Freedom & Liberteeee, the Last Bastion of the Free-Enterprise System, a Defender of Democracy” & other such incredulous claims—while staffing Secret Courts issuing Secret Court Orders to Huawei and others others
    .
    We know, when the world’s first cell-phone networks were created [the GSM standard] ( originally Groupe Spécial Mobile,currently Global System for Mobile Communications) used by over 90% of all cellphones outside the USA & Japan—we know that both the British & the French Government insisted that the architecture provide for:
    i)Lawful telephone tapping at the exchange-level ii)Civilian level encryption from telephone exchange to handset. Customers within NATO countries or equivalent allowed civilian level—other countries who are oppressive or hostile no encryption allowed to be supplied—have to invent their own iii)Police forces with a version of military-grade (lite) encryption—Britain called it the Airwave system & Greater Manchester Police & the Lancashire Constabulary had such system running by Q1 2001. By 2006 Russian Railways System police forces had adopted the Airwave standard with elements of the Russian State providing the encryption standard.iv)We know that the (initially) European railroad systems (later worldwide railroads following European standards) had invented an entire train control & signaling system (called GSM-R —R for Railways/Railroads/Chemin de Ferres) and using a “civilian-safety-critical” encryption standard.[One of the 1st “Internet of Things” standards—no?]
    We know that ARM HOLDINGS plc (Cambridge,England) is responsible for designing anywhere upto 50% of all the microchips used in mobile devices which in 2015 means they will be responsible for designing 15bn specialized microchips during 2015 ALONE.We know that for many years during the 1990s-2016 period LOGICA plc (now CGI) was able to claim that, as text messages grew in their importance, text messages passed through their software installed on over 300 mobile/cellphone/smartphone communications network providers across the world was doubling in volume every nine(9) months.
    .
    In turn,we know with the FBI/DOJ that FORENSIC MAGAZINE, reporting on the Apple v FBI/DOJ dispute, had also reported on the increased $ cost to this country’s taxpayers (local, State & National) of the FBI’s “known only to FBI employees” Science of Hair Analysis” which after at least 30+ years of misuse [ officially from 1985] by FBI employees giving –effectively– perjured testimony was finally accepted by the senior ranks of the FBI as no more “A Science” than astrology is. In addition the volunteers at the INNOCENCE PROJECT have advised that they have evidence of the FBI staff fabricating this style of evidence from as far back as the 1930’s & that the FBI staff have “trained” various State & Local forensic teams also in the Science of Astrology/Hair Analysis. I, personally, find credible the Innocence Project’s great wariness of the FBI’s claim of “ “we know nothing prior to 1985” as I was aware of a very disturbing case in Conroe, TX [30+ miles N. of Houston] as far back as 1978 [a conviction for murder on the sole piece of evidence from a Texas State Police [called the Dept of Public Safety in Texas] examiner who advised the court he was FBI trained —-of a black male janitor of an all-white school—no eye-witnesses, no motive, no confession, false or otherwise—just a single strand of hair& testimony of a “science” not recognized anywhere else on the face of the Earth & finally renounced, even in this country, in the last few years.. The case was taken up by both the Texas Monthly magazine (www.texasmonthly.com) as well as the sadly,long since shuttered Houston Post morning newspaper—but I recall little being done.
    .
    We know that, when the Madrid train bombings occurred in 2004,copies of some of the fingerprints from the scene of the crimes were transferred to the FBI in Washington to compare with the USA’s own fingerprints records & one US native-born citizen called
    BRANDON MAYFIELD was arrested by FBI agents and held for at least 3 weeks after three(3) FBI examiners claimed to be able to match the Spanish & the American version of the fingerprints. We know also that the Scotland Yard finger print examination-setter for many years (Allan Bayle) told the Seattle Times that :
    .
    “….No competent examiner should have called it a match, “said Allan Bayle, who worked for Scotland Yard for 25 years. The most basic features of the print — known as cores and deltas — did not match Mayfield’s, said Bayle, who recently studied the images. He said he can’t understand how the FBI claimed to have found more than 15 unique points common to each print.—-“It’s flawed on all levels,” said Bayle in a rare public disagreement among fingerprint experts. He called the FBI’s original analysis “horrendous.”.——-
    In order to review that case the USDOJ had to create an International Panel to Investigate & Recommend–& include individuals from: Scotland Yard & also the [Canadian] Mounties( the RCMP) as explained here
    .
    IN SUMMARY:
    Both Apple & the FBI/DOJ are following their own agenda—In Apple’s case to protect their own Marketing Strategy of proclaiming their levels of encryption as superior to all others as long as they are not required to submit themselves & their products to peer-review of their work
    .
    In the FBI’s case they have adopted the Jeffersonian habit (seen in the persecution of Aaron Burr) of “winning a conviction at all costs when at trial ” & if they should have convicted the wrong person because of a false science—-well who is there that will say that is “unacceptable”?
    .
    Again, can I recommend that you ask the National Academy of Sciences & its equivalents to staff & manage a National Center of Excellence for the Forensic Sciences & produce effective and accurate Court Evidence by learning how to extract data from any of Apple’s [& Google’s] products. If Apple refuses to submit itself to peer-review about its claims & suffers loss of credibility as a result—-so be it.
    If a corporations Financial Statements can be peer-reviewed & a litigating attorney can be “appealed” then why would you listen/accept Apple’s special claim to be exempt from that philosophy?

  15. orionATL says:

    if you want to understand who is behind sen sanders’ candidacy, then read this jill abrahmson column:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/09/hillary-clinton-winning-bernie-sanders-supporters-campaign-jill-abramson

    i think it supports my contention that “black lives matter’s” confrontation with bill clinton was a deliberate engagement intended to help sanders in the black community, where he has been weakest, with an eye on the pennsylvania primary which occurs on april 26th. as rayne commented at the end of her post above, clinton should have kept his cool. now he has appologized, but the blm tactic worked beautifully. how much impact, if any, it will have remains to be seen

    but all this contemporary manufactured political drama was stripped of its historical context – in the early 1990’s black neighborhoods were having to deal with a flood of drugs and with crack houses and blacks were deeply concerned about that influence on their communities and families. the political and legislative reaction was the 1994 crime bill which was, naturally, heartily endorsed by district attorneys and prosecutors who, with the contribution the dea, of judges, and of state and federal legislators created an enormous prison population today which is disproportionately black.

  16. Rayne says:

    orionATL — Look, we all of us get it. You’re a loyal Clintonite. Quit with the filibustering because we ALL know. Jeebus. Go knock doors and do literature drops for the campaign, do some actual good for the campaign by investing some shoe leather and sweat and spare us your insulting bloviating because you are not going to win anybody over with it.

    ian (10:43) — This:

    …I recommend that you ask the National Academy of Sciences & its equivalents to staff & manage a National Center of Excellence for the Forensic Sciences & produce effective and accurate Court Evidence by learning how to extract data from any of Apple’s [& Google’s] products.

    In short, nope.

    1) NIST already provides standards with which products for use in the US must comply. Those standards should never include ‘hackability’ or encouraged vulnerability.

    2) Insisting on a such government mechanism may allow another opportunity for products to be compromised by bad actors including foreign nation/states. The NIST itself may already have been compromised by the NSA, for example, undermining citizens’ privacy. (Which means there’s no need for another government agency to know how to hack into electronic products, right?)

    3) Proprietary business models don’t work that way — even open source development models thrive when they work in tandem with proprietary business models which are closed source. You’re asking for all electronic business to be open source in some way, thwarting intellectual property rights.

    While I’m big on open source and unhappy with our current over-zealous/too-long IP protections, entrepreneurs and inventors deserve to reap the reward for their investment and their risk taking. That reward comes from closed development, preventing competitors from profiting off others’ investments and risk taking. Insisting a government agency has access early in a product’s commercial life cycle undermines any incentives entrepreneurs and inventors have in new product development.

    • orionATL says:

      you really don’t like being challenged on arguments you make, do you rayne.

      did you notice, rayne, that the jill abrahmson article tied not only “black lives matter” but also “occupy wallstreet” to sen sanders, just as i had suggested in my initial response to the final paragraph in your column – see my comment above at 2:20 pm, item 1.

      you could have saved a lot of column inches by either ignoring my comment or declaring it at least possible given the circumstances. instead, you chose to attack.

      at the point we are at now, you could say, “well, orion you were right, you bastard ( :) )”, but you don’t have the grace to do so.

      as for my being a supporter of secretary clinton, are you just discovering that?

      where have you been?

      go back to an emptywheel post in january and look for the first comment – from me. this was before the clinton/sanders contest became a moral cause for righteous progressives here and elsewhere. there you will find a clear, public declaration from me of my support for clinton on the grounds that it was time this country had a female president and clinton was superbly qualified to be that president.

      take a look, rayne. my support for clinton is no mystery and has never been covert. how about yours? when may we know?

    • Ian says:

      Rayne, thank you for your reply.

      I respect your judgment that US Institutions & US Government Agencies should not be encouraged to learn how to access a citizen’s mobility devices without the cooperation of the citizen & also note your defense of IP rights to power the USA’s “High-Tech” industries [ I hope I didn’t misunderstand your answer].
      .
      Because I was aware of many of the arguments across the EU—-in particular in Britain & France—– during the 1990’s on how to design the underlying architecture for what was initially called Groupe Spécial Mobile [and then changed to Global System for Mobile Communications—and now often called G2] & watched the evolution & enhancement of GSM into both the “can be used by Emergency Services personnel” digital wireless/RF based networks [Airwave to British police officers] & also have some detailed knowledge
      of how the railroads of Western Europe are implementing, or more accurately are struggling to implement, a full-scale “wireless-based, Nationally Important critical infrastructure command & control system for facilities acting as a obvious target for terrorists only one level of importance below a Nuclear Reactor”—– which is what GSM-R is, I am very empathetic to the thinking process that is occurring in the EU & amongst its Institutions concerning many of the same issues that are faced by both Apple & the FBI/DOJ & the USA’s population. The EU population (& Canada) has the advantage of having already put into place a National Privacy Law [during the 1960s & 1970s]—accepting that with i)Mainframe computers ii)tied together with immediate telecommunications links & iii) the creation of very large databases [both Sweden & Britain had every individuals medical illnesses records inside a National Medical Database by 1975–& Britain has made the anonymous version of that database available for Nobel Prize winning work into the causes of “childhood leukemia”] their populations would have faced the same issues as many US citizen’s are now facing, often for the 1st time with Apple v the FBI/DOJ.
      .
      Accordingly I was NOT surprised when [1821-1959=The Manchester Guardian;1959-2016= THE GUARDIAN] carried a short article covering Martin Shultz’s [President, EU Parliament] worries over “technological determinism”[i] and nor was I surprised when the newly installed EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION SUPERVISOR announced the formation of a 6-person Advisory Group concerning what ETHICS should be encouraged in the “new digital industries”[ii]—with a reminder that the entire medical industry / professions/ institutions /vocations worldwide had faced a similar problem in the 1960’s & 1970s with “test tube babies” & “heart transplants” & “long-term comas” & “abortions”—what can be done is often NOT the same as what should be done. I noted in all the EU documents an agreement within all the EU Institutions to arrange their laws & procedures to “encourage” other countries to “come up to EU laws & procedures”—using the traditional combination of “sticks & carrots”
      .
      With the return of the City of London [www.theCityUK.com] to its role that it last unquestionably held in the 1870-1914 period, the role of “The world’s premier financing center” I was not surprised that the “global center of gravity” for what is called the “FinTech ” by the IT people, “plumbing” by the world’s bankers & financial services professionals has focused on London along with the actual Institutions of financing.[i.e. Data about Finance is now in London, not just Money for Financing].So back in January 2015 [iii]the English Prime Minister of the day [Mr Cameron] & the US President [Mr Obama] held a joint Press Conference saying that: a)the two[2] countries were going to arrange “cyber war games” using financial industry IT facilities to “attack” & “defend” each others’ “critical infrastructure” b) that both Britain’s GCHQ & its MI5 [counter-espionage/counter-subversion] agencies would have staff present within the USA to assist in “cyber-defense” & also that this country would have its NSA & FBI staff present in London-or Cheltenham c) that a determined effort would be made to make each countries “codes of best cyber-security practice” conform to a common & higher standard [which many British specialists assumed would be the British standard]
      d) that a number of Fulbright scholarships were to be funded.
      .
      I was however surprised when, on Dec 10,2015, the NYC institution known as The Clearing House [www.theclearinghouse.org] owned by 24 of the world’s largest banks who hold about 50% of all US bank deposits] announced [iv] that they had contracted with “VOCALINK, the UK-based international payment systems provider” to bring into this country an all electronic real time immediate payments hardware & software system to provide unlimited transfer of fundings through mobiles, PC’s, wire transfers & any other future devices—just as already occurs in Singapore & London using Vocalink’s systems. It would seem Apple’s Pay system will not be allowed to “walk over” US based banks after all.
      .
      Further with the March 29 2015 admission by the EU judiciary that London can be the home of ALL the clearing houses for the EU, whether within or without the eurozone [v] will prove very useful to this country should the US Treasury get its way in implementing both the letter & the spirit of the Iran nuclear arms limitation agreement with the P5+1.The agreement requires all the parties “not to hinder” the Iranian’s right to buy & to sell their products provided they don’t use any funds to build nuclear facilities for bombs—the US Treasury requires the cooperation of other countries against the more malicious of American prosecuting Attorney’s[“rogue” prosecutors seeking a political career in the American tradition]
      .
      Finally, reading The Economist of the March 26,2016 editions was an Editorial, & a Special Briefing & a detailed analysis of the historically very high –& long sustained for at least a decade of very high corporate profits for US headquartered corporations.[vi] The detailed analysis showed that for most of the 900 sectors of the US economy analyzed the level of profits was up to 40% more profitable INSIDE the US than outside, that if a corporation was historically very profitable in 2001 say, then it would still be, by historical standards for the industry, at a very high level of profits in 2015.The Economist diagnosed “lack of competition” & “”silly patent laws” that “over-protected” incumbents who would invest in “ a good lawyer” rather than “an inventor” —-which has always been the arguments that the folks over at the ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION [www.eff.org] have long made. The data was very clear that mere enforcement of the 1890s laws that sit at the heart of this country’s anti-trust law wouldn’t do—and that the most long term profitable sectors were those where the most attorney’s gathered—pharmaceuticals & “content [software,games,movies etc]
      .
      So in summary:
      The hope is that the EU, in trying to build a new country “with intelligence” will learn how to advance Western standards & that this country will gain more by adopting those standards and practices —be it a competent police force that doesn’t follow the FBI practice of falsifying forensic techniques & perjuring themselves—or an Apple that faces very stiff competition when more customers realize that their products aren’t worth any premium—that the customers learn to buy the PC—and not buy the Mac [with apologies to the TV commercials from a long time ago & far, far away.]
      .
      References:
      ( i) THE GUARDIAN: Jan 30,2016- How Europe is fighting to change tech companies’ ‘wrecking ball’ ethics
      (ii) Press Release from the EDPS 28 Jan 2016 “Brussels, 28 January 2016—– EDPS starts work on a New Digital Ethics”
      (iii) INFO SECURITY MAGAZINE: Jan 16,2015: Obama & Cameron: Arm-in-arm on Cyber-Security
      (iv) Reuters.com: Press Release | Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:30am EST
      VocaLink and The Clearing House sign a groundbreaking deal to deliver national real-time payment services in the U.S.
      (v)FINANCIAL TIMES: March 29,2015: BoE and ECB settle four-year battle over City clearing houses
      (vi)THE ECONOMIST: March 26,2016: a)Profits are too high. America needs a giant dose of competition —
      b)Too much of a good thing—Special Briefing

  17. lefty665 says:

    “Hillary Clinton is fundamentally honest and trustworthy.” From an Abramson 3/28 Guardian piece on Clinton that tells you all you need to know. That is either pure propaganda or Abramson is profoundly credulous. Either way it demonstrates that her opinions on the campaign are worthless.

    • orionATL says:

      re comment @9:46 am

      i realize the cite is ambiguous.

      the point i want to make is that the emptywheel website should welcome a different opinion on the clinton-sanders political conflict, rather than acting like a sect wherein a divergent viewpoint is a heresy.

      for the most part it has, but with major difficulty in some cases, including this one.

  18. Rayne says:

    Ian (12:00) —

    [my]…defense of IP rights to power the USA’s “High-Tech” industries [ I hope I didn’t misunderstand your answer].

    Yes, you did misunderstand my answer. Why should even the smallest business, any single inventor, bother with creating anything wholly new if the government reserves the right to demand unfettered access to it prior to commercialization? How are creators’ rights preserved if the entire public has access to their means of production by way of a forced backdoor in the form of a government office?

    This is NOT a matter preserving “High-Tech” industries alone. It’s a fundamental question for every inventor and business owner dependent on a brand new technology as part of their business model or their income.

    As for the government demanding and reserving access to itself for any reason, security or otherwise: should all safes and lockboxes, wallets and purses, similarly be crackable by the government? Is there nothing at all in the way of privacy and security the people can reserve to themselves?

    We might as well toss the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments. We’d no longer be secure in our persons or our property.

    orionATL — You made your point with your first couple of comments in this thread. You’ve now made 16 out of 36 comments in this thread on the same subject, forgive me if I’ve miscounted. You’re filibustering to the point of spamming. Knock it off.

    And my personal political opinion is just that, personal. I don’t owe you or anyone else anything more than I’ve said. You, however, need to respect this site and your fellow readers and commenters if you choose to participate here. Accept the fact that others have divergent viewpoints you so wish to protect.

    • orionATL says:

      don’t play monitor/lawyer with me, rayne. i have never spammed any cite in my life and you damned well know that. i never “filibuster”, in fact that term is completely inappropriate here. what i have done is persistently respond to your criticisms as they occurred. pulling rank and threatening is a last resort move.

      in other comments, i have made some interesting citations, observations, and comments (well i think so) which defend sec clinton’s campaign and criticize sen sanders’ campaign, comments that would never have appeared here were they not made by someone with my viewpoint.

      come to think of it, is there even one other person at this website with my willingness to openly express a pro-clinton viewpoint?

    • Ian says:

      Rayne:
      I am sorry I misunderstood your answer earlier about IP rights.

      Broadly speaking IP rights across the “already rich & prosperous countries” are configured using the legal instruments of :a )patents b) copyright c) Trademarks & a variant of trademarks Industrial Designs (Ford cars badge on the grille etc).

      Taken PATENTS for a moment:— the complaint in recent years, from such people as the ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION (www.eff.org) and also from the EU Parliament’s instructions to the EU Patent Office (located in Munich, Germany but with all the National Patent Offices acting as “agents able to receive a filing in the National language”—so North American seekers of EU patents are recommended to file into either Munich, Germany or Swansea, Wales or Dublin, Eire”) is that Washington (uspto.gov) has issued “many” patents for filings which it never should have:
      .
      “You may remember that three categories of “inventions” are not patentable: laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas……. [ww.eff.org]
      .
      You will know better than I, but the references are suggesting “Mayo v Prometheus (2012) is the case I am supposed to remember where the US Supreme Court itself had to remind all the lower courts of the basic rules—but, sadly, did NOT then order the PTO to pro-actively notify all those “wrongly-granted patents” but kept to the tradition of letting the citizenry/applicants fight all their own battles all over again
      .
      The EU Parliament has prohibited EU patents for “Business Processes” and will not allow such US-granted patents be enforced within the EU with the obvious reminder that under the US definitions I could [re]-invent the double-entry bookkeeping system [invented by 1492] and obtain a US patent.
      .
      The Chinese Government would also caution everyone that when the PTO decides what is “existing, or prior, knowledge” (for no patent can be granted for already known knowledge) is only what THE PTO KNOWS is prior knowledge—-and the PTO is an arm of the Washington Government. So if the growing of rice is a major Chinese skill & research area (with over 90% of the known strains of rice already known to the Chinese population) & the dominant research journal is published solely in China in Mandarin Chinese—and was during the Mao-Tse-Tung period in Beijing– & the PTO/Library of Congress was prohibited from “buying ” journals from Red China. So when ( I think it was Monsanto but please don’t quote me on that) bought their own copy of the Beijing Rice journal & used the knowledge to develop their own subsidiary’s version of the Chinese research using their Philippines experimental farms—the PTO naturally issued an American patent—forcing Beijing to hire expensive American attorney’s to argue that even the PTO “should have known” that the dominant body of knowledge about rice would not likely to have been US citizen controlled.
      .
      It is a similar style of complaints about the US PRACTICE regarding Copyright where such institutions as the Digital Millenium Copyright Act seem to submit the http://www.youtubes.com of this world to a legal requirement of “notice & takedown” where a complainer makes an UNsworn statement [i.e. not in an affidavit] that “I own the copyright”, upon which the user of the supposedly copyrighted material must immediately takedown/delete the “offending material” if a US resident—if a foreign resident there is NO requirement to give notice at all—just delete the copyrighted material—because they are foreigners.
      .
      It was only in Sept 2015 that the US Supreme Court agreed individuals in this country have NOT lost their “fair use rights” as they are called, in the case Lenz v Universal Music (the “dancing Baby Case”)[Sept 2015]. The proposed TPP treaty would extend the US PRACTICES to its treaty holders apart from Canada & Chile [www.michaelgeist.ca]
      who were able to exempt themselves from many of these “bad practices routinely engaged in beyond even US law”
      .
      I would value your opinion—when YOU were talking about IP rights—were you close to MY OWN position that:
      .
      The granting of a US patent to a US patent holder, while in many cases is routine, and should be upheld without fail by the courts of this country & also of any countries legally bound to this countries Institutions by the Patent Cooperation Treaty, nevertheless, because of the controversial practices routinely found at the PTO–& in the countries US (Federal) Judiciary—should also be thought of as a very “challengeable” document.
      .
      Similarly the creation by Act of Congress of the current legal definition of “copyright” , whether by accident or by design of the Congress, is so disconnected from the actual practices of the countries population that many of the assertions of “wrongdoing” by supposed copyright holders should be taken “with a pinch of salt”

      –or ARE WE AS FAR APART AS EVER?

  19. Rayne says:

    Les 1:24 — Adhesive bandaids work well though the adhesive is messy. I use painters tape–a small piece reversed over lens with larger piece adhesive down over that to hold it down. Its low tack adhesive is clean, easy to lift.

Comments are closed.