I don’t like to discuss religion or politics in polite company. It’s pointless. Both subjects provoke passionate lectures espousing personal worldviews, and minds are seldom, if ever, changed. But … after watching some of the speeches and debates, reading some tweets, and switching between the parade of pundits on CNN, Fox News and MSNBC, I've started to wonder what @tjeff (my hypothetical twitter handle for a reincarnated Thomas Jefferson) would have had to do to find the facts upon which to base his independent thinking.
Apple v. FBI has started a serious debate about the line between security and privacy. The FBI says this is a case about the contents of one specific iPhone 5c. Apple says this is a case about securing data for everyone. Since current vintage iPhones (5s, 6, 6s) can not be hacked the same way, we should not be talking about a particular phone; we should be talking about encryption writ large, and how it is used in our daily lives.
Apple v. FBI is headed for the Supreme Court. The problem is, I don't want the Supreme Court (or any court) empowered to make policy – that's a job for the Legislative branch. Regardless of what you think of Congress, they’d better get this one right. What it means to be a digital citizen and identifying the border between security and privacy are two of the most important issues of our time.
Apple posted the highest quarterly earnings in American history (Q415) and took huge hit. Some people blaming Apple's $30 billion market cap haircut on the economic slowdown in China -- but if you don't live there, it's hard to understand the complex relationships Chinese people have with Western brands.
Information warfare is ongoing, intensifying and global. This is not new, but it is newly relevant because the Internet (and associated technologies) fully democratize the weapons. While we are fighting an asymmetrical physical war, the information war being fought on a much more level playing field. Or is it?