[ChrisBland]

This debate is not about the direct ask imo, but more about the precedent that it would set and what the fbi could compel a tech company to do under the AWA. While in tech we tend to turn up our noses to the 'its always been done that way' mentality, the law takes a different approach, once you comply with the first request, it makes it harder, if not impossible to stop the subsequent requests. Which is why the fbi waited until something related to 'terrorism' to make this ask. I would be willing to be every last dollar I have in the bank that there is no useful info on that phone, and that if there were useful info, the nsa would have already had access to it.

To me, the really fun mental exercise is to identify when this would be acceptable. If there was a bomb about to go off and hypothetically the location was written on the phone, and only on the phone, would we agree that apple should break in? What if the bomb was a dirty bomb, what about a nuke? Now the slippery slope is where does that stop, a backpack bomb? Bomb making materials, texts to people about a bomb, what about a gun? What about a knife....