In one of the most intriguing constitutional paradoxes to date Apple’s latest move has been to file a motion opposing the government’s order to unlock the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers.
Major tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Facebook have rallied in support of Apple but I can’t help thinking that while I understand Apple’s position with regard to its security protocols and the need to limit the scope of government interference, the situation as a whole calls for deeper speculation.
In 2014 Apple took the liberty of uploading U2’s latest album “Songs of Innocence” to every Apple user’s iTunes library without their consent. The backlash was significant and widespread. I can’t help but think that there’s a paradox in Apple’s logic.
Apple refuses to unlock the iPhone of a terrorist but will access and upload media to their consumers’ individual iTunes libraries and by default devices without permission.
Apple’s position is the government wants the tech company to create new software break into Mr. Farook’s iPhone that could later be used to hack into other people’s iPhones. This is the crux of their argument and while on a philosophical level I understand their point, reality contradicts their logic.
The concept of ‘privacy’ is radically different that the one we grew up with. We all have a digital footprint that is monitored and fully trackable. And who knows exactly what tech company’s are doing with all their users’ data? The dawn of the digital era was a decade a go and the rules of engagement have changed.
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.
Where do you stand? Would love to have your opinion!