So I think the fundamental claim he's making is at least a little bit flawed, and that's before we even get into discussions about whether it's technologically feasible or whether law enforcement can be trusted with the expanded powers.
We are under no duty whatsoever to make life easier for Hoover's little nut cult.
He basically wants the right to secretly dig a tunnel under your home, sneak in while you're not there, steal whatever they want, and leave without anyone knowing it. Except in your phone.
Even worse: he want the tunnels being pre-dug (= "backdoors").
You know how in Switzerland every house has a mandatory under-ground shelter ?
What he wants is every single house in the USA having a mandatory underground tunnel that leads to a nearby police station. A *secret* tunnel that you're forbidden to know about when you buy your house.
That's what an encryption backdoor is the equivalent of : a mandatory secret back-door built in every house in the USA.
And with the automation and international connection that is available on the internet, the real-world situation is even worse than this putative mandatory tunnel.
(Now the metaphor is getting a bit harder...)
It would be as if the police station had an nearly infinite amount of low-ranking police personal that could devote their entire time to travel the tunnel each day, sneak into your house every single day, and take a picture of you naked in your shower. And not only you personnally, but though every tunnel, available in every single home built on US soil under US building code. Each fucking day.
But said local police station lacks trained and experienced detective to do anything useful out of the photos/objects/proofs brought back from by the agents.
And meanwhile, all the people living outside of the USA are completely immune to it because their local building code either don't mandate the tunnel (and thus, the US police agents can't even use this tunnel network to peak into the homes of ISIS terrorists, although that was the main selling point of the tunnel network when it was voted in)
Or mandate an entirely different type of tunnel that the US police has never heard off (and leaves some part of the US population at risk, because they buy and install a port-a-potty from China, and never realise that these come with tunnels leading directly into their chinese secret police).
All the while the Russia mafia has trained an incredibly huge army of burglars to roam the US (and Chinese) networks of secret tunnels, stealing as much as possible from every house they happen to reach. And even sometimes using your own house as a base of operation to commit crimes while you're away for work. (botnets).
At the end of the operation, maybe 1 single terrorist happens to get caught due to random chance. And maybe due to the fact that he was bragging that he is a terrorist the whole day in the middle of the street ( = wasn't even using encryption at all. Just plain text SMS.)
At the same time there will be millions of damage due to stolen property through the tunnels network.
( = just have a look at the massive data leaks that you have *today* when hacker still go through the long round about route of actually hacking into servers. Now think how much more damage would be done when the hack don't actually even bother to hack, but just leverage the backdoors that are mandated by the various governments)
(And "What does God need with a starship?")
Brave is trying to make a profitable business with certain things relating to security, but who in their right mind thinks that this is somehow an improvement upon or necessary for secure web browsing? 26,000 engineers? Grandma? Millennials? Who?
No one's thinking of security, or they'd have kiboshed this and a dozen other features, and put the enablement or access of them in a different binary that the OS mediates access to as needed.
Is there seriously not enough interest in a basic, capable web browser that doesn't implement this stuff that an OSS project can't be started up to focus on it?
We still cannot spend more than we make.
What's your next guess?
That's exactly what the Fed is all about.
If Obama wasn't such a pussy he'd tell them to fuck off.
He didn't use those terms, but he has weighed in on Apple's side.
I write web services for remote clients to send information to. 50 msec includes the time to establish a TCP connection to the nginx frontend (written in C!), then to run a little bit of Python code to massage the request and either store it in a database (probably written in C, or maybe Java) or fetch data from one, then to return the results to the remote client. At a previous employer, my code did that about 80,000 times per second, averaged 24/7. At the shop before that, we load tested to 500,000 requests per second but it was only for a few minutes sustained at a time.
When was the last time you personally wrote code to handle 500Kops? Did you know that those durn whippersnappers at Google runs a big chunk of their stack on Python and that they'd laugh at our tiny it doesn't matter to the end user. If we could have reduced a 50ms transaction to 10ms by altering the speed of the light signals carrying our requests, we probably would have. But since we live in a universe with physics, the best we could possible hope for was to reduce the time spent in application code to 0.000ms and thereby drop the entire transaction time to 49ms.
: a device that steers a ship, aircraft, or spacecraft in place of a person
Note the "in place of a person".
Note also the "device that steers" (it more or less keeps a trajectory fro the plane/ship, or in the case of cars like BMW, Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, etc. it keeps a lane).
Not "device that handle entirely automatically the complete travel from point A to point B" (that would be an *AUTONOMOUS* car, like Google's, some subs in big cities, busses by other startups. Or simply horses and donkeys).
Cars' driving assistance like Tesla's Autopilot actually behave exactly like the autopilot in a plane or on a ship. You just need to actually know what an autopilot actually does.
Common, this guy is basically inventing a "Spiderman Gun".
Think of the the views his demo could get on Youtube !!!
I am actually following the "silly wire drone interceptor" discussion (a.k.a: admit you always wanted to build yourself a "Spiderman Gun" !)
If you have problems typing your story on the phone, try using a keyboard (I have an original Think Outside keyboard left from my PalmOS days, that still works perfectly with my current Jolla Phone - Nowadays, the foldable you get from Geyes on Amazon are of slightly less good quality).
externally-powered microUSB OTG hub is another solution that works with any USB keyboard you have around.
Or, you know. You could actually learn how to write good code at the most powerful level. That's a radical thought.
I did, and that's why I'm using Python. I'm capable of writing web services in C, but who the hell's got time for that craziness? Also consider Amdahl's Law: in most of stuff I write, the "running code to process data" bit is a teensy portion of wall clock time. Much more is spent in socket handshaking or waiting for database queries to finish. Out of a 50ms request lifecycle, perhaps 1ms is spent inside a box that I have complete control of. Even if I rewrote it in assembler (C is for high-level pansies) to be 1000x faster, the request would still take 49.001ms. An assload of work porting security-sensitive code into an untyped languages so that the end result can be 2% faster? Yeah, no. My boss would fire me with a quickness if I proposed that.
I'd be much more likely to rewrite performance-critical code in Go or Rust. They're as fast as C but without the death of a thousand cuts like gotofail waiting to ruin your careful planning. Life's too short to waste it hacking in languages that hate you and make you want to look incompetent.
Statistics are no substitute for judgement. -- Henry Clay