133
A recent case involving GrapheneOS's duress feature has sparked a debate about the balance between privacy and law enforcement. If someone is forced to unlock their phone, should they have the right to protect their personal data with an emergency wipe feature?
At the same time, critics argue that the same feature could be used by criminals to destroy evidence during an investigation, making it harder for law enforcement to do their job.
Where do you stand? Should operating systems include features like this, or do the risks outweigh the privacy benefits? .
Evidence of what?
What crime did this person commit that you needed the "evidence" on his phone?
This is as bullshit as seeing "resisting arrest" being the only conviction. You didn't have a legitimate reason to arrest, or you wouldn't have gone with "resisting", you would have convicted for that reason. If they were probably doing something illegal, then the conviction should be simple and easy, not "well we couldn't get the primary charges to stick, but when we broke his hand he fell, so he clearly resisted arrest and that's why he's in jail"
Csam
Is there a court case? A legal warrant?
You just casually carry that around on your phone?
well, in the case of an actual pedophile - not this guy - yes, I do believe they are either dumb or mentally ill enough to carry it around.
No, fuck is wrong with you? That's like asking me "you just casually murder people?" in defense of someone suspected of murder.
Exactly. Show us your house, your computer, your phone... If you didn't commit murder and have kiddy porn, you have nothing to fear.
Do you see the issue here?
Tell me how the guy in the post is suspect of csam then.