Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Case study on terrorism
Case study on terrorism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Case study on terrorism
Pros and cons of Apple taking a stance on security. The FBI wants Apple to make a ( master key) to let them access every apple owners device so that they can research and monitor crime and terrorist attacks. The reason this problem arose was because of the terrorist attack in San Bernardino California. While Apple says they show the terrorist no mercy but they won't give the FBI access to the devices because that could potentially open a door to hackers and such. The FBI is trying their second option which is to force Apple to give them access to the devices by a law called the All Writs Act of 1789. The problem is Apple wants to try to persuade the FBI not to do this because Apple believes that this is the worst mistake that could be made
In doing so, they used 3 different logical structures in their arguments: precedent, degree, and analogies. Tim Cook debated with a constructive argument, “to guarantee such a powerful tool isn’t abused and don’t fall into the wrong hands is to never create it” (The Guardian, 2016). This is an example of degree argument, as the audience will automatically agree with any arguments with less of bad things because it is good. Apple knows there are no other cases like this one, so there’s nothing to compare to. Letting the government into the iPhone only this one time can set a dangerous precedent that can potentially force Apple to force open every iPhone in the future at government request. This became a heated legal battle, granting the access in their products for law enforcement was compared to “a political question” by Apple with an analogy (Yadron,
Should Apple be forced to unlock an iPhone or not? It becomes a controversial topic during these years. Most people are concerned with their privacy and security. Darrell Issa is a congressman and has served the government since 2001. Recently, he published “Forcing Apple to Hack That iPhone Sets a Dangerous Precedent” in Wired Magazine, to persuade those governors worked in the Congress. It is easier to catch administrators’ attention because some of them want to force Apple to unlock the iPhone. Darrel Issa focuses on governors because he thinks they can support the law to make sure that everyone has privacy. He addresses the truth that even some of the governors force Apple to hack iPhones when they need people’s information. He considers maintaining people’s privacy as the primary purpose. He also insists that Apple should not be forced to use their information which could lead people’s safety. In “Forcing Apple to Hack That iPhone Sets a Dangerous Precedent,” Darrell Issa uses statistics and historical evidence to effectively persuade his audience of governors that they need to consider whether or not Apple should be forced to hack or not because it could bring people to a dangerous situation and forget the purpose of keeping people’s privacy.
In today 's generation many adults and teenagers keep everything from contacts numbers to their social security numbers on their smartphones. When customers, including criminals and terrorists purchase their smartphones, they are buying it with the assurance that not some, but all of their information and privacy will be safeguarded. The issue occurring today deals with the suspected terrorist of the San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015 shooting involving over 30 injured people. Syed Farook, the suspected terrorist Apple IPhone is locked with a 4 code password and the government wants Apple to create a backdoor operating systems that allows them to computerize as many passcodes they can to unlocks the terrorists IPhone. Apple strongly believes that creating this necessary backdoor system will create a negative chain of effects that will affect everyone from smartphone users to social media companies and their privacy. The FBI recently has taken Apple to court to create the necessary backdoor operating systems to get around the security features created on the Apple IPhones. Apple has the legal right to refuse creating a “backdoor” software to get into suspected terrorists iphone because it invades the privacy of Apple 's customers, it will set a precedent for other companies, and the FBI will mislead Apple.
The letter is largely dependent upon juxtaposition and inductive reasoning. In the beginning of the letter, the writers state that they “recognize the need to ensure strong protections for national security,” suggesting that the FBI has a legitimate reason to request Apple for technical support (Pen America). Right after, however, they claim that “what the FBI is asking Apple to do would erode the vital U.S. values of free expansion and privacy,” showing their disapproval towards the agency (Pen America). Throughout the letter, juxtaposition appears regularly, first stating authors’ recognition of the FBI’s legitimacy, then proclaiming the consequence that would come due to the victory of the agency. Besides juxtaposition, inductive reasoning can also be found within the letter. The letter claims that if the decryption code is created, the government would be able to abuse the authority they’re given, and “upset a long-held balance” and that “hundreds of millions of people… better keep that in mind [that their messages and any other digital creations are no longer secured]” (Pen America). The letter explains the consequence using inductive reasoning in order to argue that such a large portion of the privacy can not be sacrificed to further enhance
The feud between Apple Company and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) started after the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California on December 2015. The FBI named the man responsible for the Massacre as Syed Rizwan Farook along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik. The police killed the couple during the shootout and found an iPhone (Apple product) used by Farook which later the FBI learned was given to him by his employer from the government. In order to trace others involved in the killings, the FBI requested Apple to help them crack the phone because they don’t want to risk deleting the possible information they need. “Cracking the phone” is a process of making a backdoor or breaking into the secured computer system with certain software which enables illegal copying of data (techopedia). I thought it was absurd to know that during the House committee hearing on March 3, 2016, Apple dismissed the FBI request to crack the mobile phone used by Farook in the San Bernardino Massacre on December
Tim Cook is being stubborn by not letting the FBI have access to the software to get information from the terrorist’s user accounts. The FBI is trying to prevent terrorist’s attacks from happening in the future. I do not understand why Tim Cook is being so stubborn, about letting the FBI use the software to have access into terrorist’s accounts. Tim does not understand,
Apple’s refusal to aid the FBI in obtaining information was wrong. When tragedy strikes America, it is the duty of the citizens to do everything they can do in order to protect America from premeditated terrorist attacks occurring. In order to help prevent terrorist attacks from taking place, large companies, such as Apple, should unite with the government in order to make the world safer, and possibly prevent future attacks from occurring. The article,”PRO/CON: Should Apple have resisted FBI pressure to hack an iPhone?” by Tribune News Service summarizes the pro’s and con’s of Apple’s refusal to collaborate with the FBI. The pro’s portion of the article makes it clear that the fourth amendment protects the information of citizens. The con’s portion states that influential companies should be aiding the US government in a way similar to during World War II. So, Apple should help the FBI in their search
In this case it’s I think important to understand that Apple would happily open this one phone and give the FBI the info they needed. But this isn’t what the government really wants. The government wants a backdoor key into the operating system itself. This means that government will have total right of entry into your iPhone. This has to be regulated to protect
When Apple said ¨no¨ the FBI tried to sue Apple because of this. Apple should not have to comply with anything that the FBI asks in regards of forcing Apple to make a device that invades another's privacy. First of all, if Apple were to do something like this it would take away anyone with one of their phone´s 4th amendment. Both ¨No unreasonable searches” and “ valid warrants¨. Also, as stated in PRO/CON: Was Apple justified in refusing to help the FBI?
It is safe to say that the FBI and the US Government are not seeing eye to eye with Apple at the moment. After the FBI ordered Apple to hack into one of their iPhones, Tim Cook expressed his opinions. He stated how this was chilling, and would completely undermine the freedoms that the government is trying to protect. The reason why the FBI and US Government are doing this is because of San Bernardino mass shooting. I also think that Edward Snowden may have said it best years ago.
On October 5, 2011 Steve Jobs passed away in his home in Palo Alto California; Jobs had been battling pancreatic cancer since 2003. Steve brought so much different technological advancement that most people use everyday without knowing who created them. Everything that Jobs created, he did because he understood what his customers wanted, and where the market was going. Steve Jobs believed in all of his products and innovations he sold to people, and had faith in the people he worked with was what really shaped Apple. After leaving the company and then returning, Steve Jobs’ influence made Apple one of the top computer companies in the world.
Let’s take a trip back in time and review the evolution of a computer company. It’s not IBM or Microsoft. This company is Apple Computers, Incorporated. In the year 1976, before most people even thought about buying a computer for their homes. Back then the computer community was only a few nerds building simple computers from hobby kits. When Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs sold a van and two programmable calculators for thirteen hundred dollars and started Apple Computers, Inc., in Jobs garage, the reach for success seemed far.
Almost every house in America and even the world has some sort of Apple or Microsoft product. In the world today we rely strictly on technology to survive, and doing so we are willing to pay top dollar for the best of the best. These new Cloud and Droid devices continue to grow in size and in options, this unfortunately means the price will continue to raise. Microsoft and Apple have been head to head for years on trying to discover the next best thing. Apple as we all know changed the world with the delivery of the iPhone and has been on the top of the charts ever since, but this has not always been the case.
Apple was founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, who were determined to change the way people were utilizing the computer. From then Apple has been able to grow its business into one of the most prominent company in the world. Apple Inc. is an American company that creates software, cellular phones, computers and consumer electronic products as well. Some of the Apple products most recognized products are the iPod, iPhone, Mac, and the recently new iPad. They have established over 300 retail stores in about 10 countries around the world. Many people do not know this, but also service numerous of computer software, such as Mac OS X operating system, Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio, iOS, which is a mobile operating system that hosts
I’ve been to the apple store before. However, like most of their customers, I’ve came in with an agenda already in mind. I assumed that the Apple store wasn’t where most people would come to kill time or observe- instead repair a phone, or even make a long awaited purchase- however that’s exactly what I was doing. I thought it would be best to go earlier on a sunday morning, hoping there would be less people and distractions. The weather was typical for a sunday- freezing, light blue skies without a sun in sight. Prior to arriving, I decided that I was going to divide my time in half. Half of my time would be spent observing from the outside looking in, while the other half I would place myself directly inside the mayhem. I wanted to get the