chaz72

I intend to. But my initial position is that it's far more likely that Apple will fail to be perfect than that they are intentionally orchestrating a coverup.

That said, I think all this syncing and cloud stuff - in its early days, at least - is way overcomplicated and more error-prone both in its features and its security than it needs to be. I expect mistakes from all implementations for quite some time to come.

Apple has staked their reputation on the line and said "send us an NSL if you like, we have nothing we can give you". And the cryptographic principles, if executed properly, are sound.

Maybe they're lying. Maybe Snowden 2.0 will come out next year and tell us the truth and instantly destroy their credibility. That's a gamble I wouldn't take with my company, but it's plausible.

See I figure, if you're a threat to National Security, the NSA still has options. They just don't include monitoring over the wire or asking Apple or Google for it.

edit: The Intercept article [4] you mention above suggests to me more that they aren't yet finished implementing it properly and less that they are lying. I would take it as a work in progress.

er - possibly, I'm not a lawyer. I read it somewhere on the internet and it sounded credible at the time.

Nope. They could use a warrant to compel the sender or the recipient of the messages to unlock them or face jail time. But Apple doesn't have the keys.

Exactly. The world has had some time to react to last year's revelations, and this is just getting started!

This year, you're absolutely right: Apple has among the best support for older devices, among smartphone makers, which are a breed apart from more general purpose computing.

For now.

Long term, as things stabilize, I think we all can agree we want more from these gadgets.

plot twist: a Swift-to-JS compiler

More secure than Flash or Silverlight which are what I personally use today. VP9 and Daala are not, as far as I know, available for me to use when watching netflix.

You are presumably already choosing not to use Netflix now. I'm not. I'm choosing to use Netflix now, and I want the more secure, more efficient built-in method.

That said, I would like a more secure, more efficient built-in method for any non-DRM video source that chooses to be distributed openly too!

As far as I can tell, as long as the DRM is in Flash or Silverlight then some people still hope that "getting rid of DRM" is a winnable fight.

I doubt that's true, myself. It'd be nice, but I don't see it happening.

My online video watching is primarily Netflix with a healthy dose of Hulu Plus, iTunes, and Youtube. Not much of it is available without DRM. That is not a technical choice. That is a commercial choice being made by the people who own the content. Since I'm not going to steal it from them, their choice matters more than mine.

So DRM stays. Might as well have it built-in, more efficient and more secure.

Yeah, maybe to Wired it makes sense to say "they should have just used Python or Ruby". No doubt those languages can be optimized just as well. Lol, why would that be hard?

Granted, a primary source would have been better, but the NY Times does link to several. Though you didn't cite a lot of primary sources in your own comment, I would still be interested in your real response to the referenced studies.

Microsoft had a monopoly position at that time, and Apple does not.

Not at all. Make it clear to OEM partners that this is not a competitor to their low-margin products but rather a competitor to Apple's high-margin products. MS & OEMs both need to understand that it will always be a small fraction of market share. It makes the Windows brand more valuable, though: Some of their customers want a high-end device that's made to run Windows, and where else can you get that these days?

What they consider to be the "third entry" is a cryptographically signed receipt.

Is that a newly invented "triple entry" or is that just a better way to keep track of the traditional "source documents"? (still a good idea, but maybe it doesn't need a fancy new term)

The title is "How I learned to...", so I think he's following his own advice here.