Apple encrypts your data but Apple also can easily look at your files and information, exactly like FBI, CIA, NSA, and other agencies. Apple can look at your photos, read your private notes, save a copy of your messages and chats, and follow up your communications easily.

Apple does encrypt your data but only with its own private key. Your sensitive data are not encrypted with your key. It means whoever encrypts the data (in this case, Apple) can also decrypt them.

Apple is very proud of its privacy and advertises a lot about it but what Apple doesn’t explain about this encryption, is how it works.

Apple dances around the encryption saying that your data are encrypted “in transit” and “on server” but this encryption is as unacceptable as Zoom’s, Facebook’s, or Google’s encryption.

While ago, Zoom announced that it’s going to encrypt users’ data “end-to-end” only for paying users and a lot of people complained about it. If what Zoom does is wrong, so is Apple.

iCloud and our device backups hold a lot more of our sensitive, private data than our video calls do, and over much a longer time span.

Zoom doesn’t end-to-end encrypt the contents of individual calls. Apple fails to end-to-end encrypt your entire device backup (on by default!), which contains your complete message history for every single iMessage and SMS conversation you have ever had on the device, without time limitation.

Protesters reported men ripping up signs, yelling homophobic slurs, and spitting on people. And the police greeted them as friends.

As thousands in Philadelphia marched to end police brutality against Black Americans on Monday, a group of white men carrying bats, golf clubs, and other improvised weapons gathered in the city’s Fishtown neighborhood.

Drawing comparisons to brownshirts, the group of about 50 to 70 men were filmed heckling and threatening a small group of protesters in the neighborhood. 

One of the men was recorded ripping up a protester’s Black Lives Matter sign while yelling homophobic slurs. A producer for WHYY, the local public radio station, tweeted that he was beaten up after trying to film the group. A few men were spotted with rifles.

Joshua Potash also tweeted “These white people are now roaming Philly with the blessing of the police. This is what the President of the United States just endorsed. pic.twitter.com/lZOKFDfoLL

Read this note on The Guardian.

There’s a huge concern about recent protests around the world and coronavirus. More than 6.5 million cases of coronavirus are reported and United States has the most cases. Near 2 million people are affected in USA and with current protests regarding the murder of George Floyd, a black human being, by blue pigs there’s a concern that it can lead to more people being affected.

I believe people should not stop protests but they should keep distance with each other in the streets but if you feel your life is in danger or you have symptoms of the virus, please avoid participating in the protests.

Wearing medical/hygienic gloves and mask can help you be safer but it doesn’t make you completely safe.

Our fight goes on but to fight, we need people so put your health first.

Four major book publishers have filed suit against the Internet Archive for copyright violations relating to the Open Library project, setting the stage for a major legal fight over one of the internet’s longest-running ebook archives.

Launched in 2006, Internet Archive’s Open Library allows users to borrow ebooks scanned from physical copies, according to a theory called “controlled digital lending” (or CDL) that limits how many times a single scan can be borrowed at once.

The project expanded in March with the launch of the National Emergency Library, which suspended waitlists in response to the global pandemic, making all scanned books immediately accessible to anyone with an account.

Reached for comment, Internet Archive founder Brewster Kahle called the lawsuit “disappointing.”

“As a library, the Internet Archive acquires books and lends them, as libraries have always done,” Kahle told The Verge. “This supports publishing and authors and readers. Publishers suing libraries for lending books — in this case, protected digitized versions, and while schools and libraries are closed — is not in anyone’s interest.”

“We hope this can be resolved quickly,” he continued.

Update: After reading the full notice on Fedora download page, Mr. Stallman says that Fedora didn’t require users to promise anything therefor it’s not a violation of software libre terms.

If you study it carefully, it does not require the downloader to promise not to do certain things. Rather, it requires the downloader to affirm awareness of these US rules, which may or may not apply.

Because of this, it does not contradict the GPL.

However, as our discussion shows, it is easy for people to misundestand and get the wrong idea about what it actually requires. They mey THINK it requires something that would violate the GPL even though it actually does not.

Richard Stallman

Original note:

Following my email message to Mr. Stallman, I had a lot of other discussions with different people but I think the best response was from Mr. Stallman himself.

He stated that the notice on Fedora download page makes it nonfree and the limitations are not compatible with GPL license.

Here’s Mr. Stallman’s email message:

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden’s example. ]]]

> I believe parts of this notice are violations of software freedom. The notice says that Fedora complies with “Unites States Export Administration Regulations (the =E2=80=9CEAR=E2=80=9D) and it’s prohibited for use in connection with the design, development or production of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, or rocket systems, space launch vehicles, or sounding rockets, or unmanned air vehicle systems.”

As stated, that would make Fedora nonfree. However, Fedora cannot impose such requirements on GPL-covered programs unless Fedora has the copyright.

The GNU Project encryption programs were developed outside the US and I think users get them without passing through the FS.

> The other part says “You may not provide Fedora software or technical information to individuals or entities located in one of these countries or otherwise subject to these restrictions.”

Isn’t it a violation of freedom 2 (The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others)?

Yes, it would be — but I don’t think anyone can enforce it on you if you are outside the US and you download Fedora. That is why I did not make a fuss about it.

> So does that mean that I, a typical user of software libre, am restricted from using and distributing a software that is licensed free? Do you and free software movement accept this discrimination?

The reason for section 8 is to prevent patents from being used to make a program effectively nonfree.

If in country C some company Q threatens to make the program priorietary by suing the users using Q’s patent, that would in effect make the program proprietary.

Using section 8, the developer can say, “You can’t make my program proprietary. With section 8 I make it not available at all in country C. Give my program liberty or give it death!.”

In other words, “I’d rather destroy my program than let you turn it into your proprietary product.”

RMS's email regarding Fedora's discrimination and violation of software freedom terms.

The International Day of Innocent Children Victims of Aggression is a United Nations observance each 4 June. It was established on 19 August 1982.

Originally focused on victims of the 1982 Lebanon War, its purpose expanded to “acknowledge the pain suffered by children throughout the world who are the victims of physical, mental and emotional abuse. This day affirms the UN’s commitment to protect the rights of children.”

The General Assembly, having considered the question of Palestine at its resumed seventh emergency special session, “appalled at the great number of innocent Palestinian and Lebanese children victims of Israel’s acts of aggression” decided to commemorate 4 June of each year as the International Day of Innocent Children Victims of Aggression. 31st plenary meeting 19 August 1982.

If you see child abuse or aggression against any child, please call your local child support center, police station, or social worker. Also, there’s a helpful article on Medical News Today.

The extreme righteous of our nation have used time much more effectively than the forces of good will. And it may well be that we will have to repent in this generation, not merely for the vitriolic words and the violent actions of the bad people who would bomb a church in Birmingham, Alabama but for the appalling silence and indifference of the good people who sit around and say wait on time. Somewhere we must come to see that human progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and the persistent work of dedicated individuals who are willing to be co-workers with God. And without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the primitive forces of social stagnation. And so it is necessary to help time and to realize that the time is always right to do right.

Martin Luther King Jr.

I should somehow apologies for one of my previous notes, “It’s Human Rights“. I still believe in what I said but my point was not completely correct.

When we say black lives matter, it doesn’t mean that other lives doesn’t matter. It simply means there’s more discrimination and injustice towards black human beings.

Imagine a group of people sitting on a table to eat. Everybody gets a plate of food except Tom. Tom says “I’m hungry too. I deserve food too” and someone responds “We all are hungry. We all deserve food.” It’s correct but it doesn’t change the fact that Tom doesn’t have food.

We’re all sitting on a table with our plates full of food and we shout that we all deserve food but shouting it doesn’t change the fact that Tom is still hungry.

Do all lives matter? Yes but saying it doesn’t change the fact that black lives haven’t mattered for years.

Update: Mr. Stallman responded.

A while ago I wrote a blog post about moving from Fedora. After a lot of discussions with my friends, I finally decided to send an email message to Mr. Stallman about Fedora’s notice. I’m now waiting for Mr. Stallman’s response. Here’s my email message:

Dear Dr. Stallman,
Howdy.

Mr. Stallman, I’m a software libre activist for more than 7 years now and I’ve using software libre since I found out about the concept of software freedom. There’s not a single proprietary software in my computers. I even didn’t have a smart phone till a year ago. My phone currently runs LineageOS.

My operating system was Fedora untill I found out about a notice on Fedora GNU+Linux distro download page. https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/download/

I believe parts of this notice are violations of software freedom. The notice says that Fedora complies with “Unites States Export Administration Regulations (the “EAR”) and it’s prohibited for use in connection with the design, development or production of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, or rocket systems, space launch vehicles, or sounding rockets, or unmanned air vehicle systems.”

Isn’t it violation of freedom 0 (The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose)?

The other part says “You may not provide Fedora software or technical information to individuals or entities located in one of these countries or otherwise subject to these restrictions.”

Isn’t it a violation of freedom 2 (The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others)?

The four freedoms doesn’t mention any country or specific software so I believe the terms of software freedom are applicable to all software no matter what country they’re based in.

A friend of mine told me that section 8 of GNU General Public License version 2 accept this discrimination.

“8. If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the original copyright holder who places the Program under this License may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among countries not thus excluded. In such case, this License incorporates the limitation as if written in the body of this License. “

So does that mean that I, a typical user of software libre, am restricted from using and distributing a software that is licensed free? Do you and free software movement accept this discrimination?

All my life, I fought for freedom. I’m an Iranian and I live in a country that basic human rights are violated and I fought for freedom and my people’s rights in the streets with my bare hands. If free software movement, FSF, and you sir, accept this discrimination, I no longer will fight for software libre as it’s just a lie to me.

I know that companies and maybe projects based in U.S. should comply with USA’s laws but it’s not a good reason for discrimination like this. If software libre can be restricted for some people or it can only be used by a group of people a country or a company chooses, then I believe free software movement is not what it says it is.

I remember you once said that free (as in freedom) software leads us to a free society. If this freedom is only for some people, then it’s just a lie, isn’t it?

Can you please explain to me and my friends how free software movement reacts to this?

Thanks a lot.

Ali Reza Hayati