Apple’s dangerous game, part 2

Re:Apple’s dangerous game, part 2 by GuiA on Monday September 22, 2014 @10:07AM (#8350577)

That's great. While I read his articles, I didn't bother to read the name of the author because the validity of a reasoning should be independent of who wrote it. Reading his original article just gave me a headache for the reasons cited in my first comment.

I will agree fully with you on 3), and partially on 5) (only partially, because on one hand I agree with the premise, but otoh if you're in a position of authority your job is precisely to understand despite potentially poor communication from other experts).

(I'm also not sure what my "accusations" are.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple’s dangerous game, part 2 by arjunnarayan on Monday September 22, 2014 @02:16PM (#8351719)

I apologize. I wasn't really replying to you, but also to many of the comments on this story that have been more insulting to Orin Kerr. E.g. "It is completely irresponsible of a man of his intelligence/qualifications to post something", "He still sounds like a government key escrow apologist,", "you should lose your fucking license to practice law.", "Sounds like an apologist and a shill for the entitlement mentality".

I disagree with your sentiment that we should weep for the future of our world governments. I think things are slowly changing around in the right direction, and a lot of that is thanks to people like Orin Kerr who are capable of changing their minds when presented with hard evidence.

[ Parent | on HN ]