[5thGenTexan]

And you know the government will not ask them to use this knowledge more often and for lesser cases how, exactly?

This is the same government that has high up bureaucrats who believe conservative groups in the US are a bigger threat than Islamic Terorrists.

[HiTech RedNeck]

If we are paranoid enough, we would do our level best to prevent the government from being able to wage war.

We don’t find an answer in paranoia. We find it in the rights and blessings bestowed literally (not figuratively) by God.

[Sacajaweau]

Apple will probably have a new device available with advanced security waaaaaay beyond this devices capability. It’s looking more and more like a marketing event from my window.

[Sacajaweau]

How do we know?? Well it would probably make the news....that’s how.

[zedee]

And you know the government will not ask them to use this knowledge more often and for lesser cases how, exactly?

Exactly. One of Apple's biggest legal arguments in this case is that the feds' request that they create a new version of iOS (which would enable the phone to be unlocked using brute force techniques) creates an "unreasonable burden." As soon as Apple creates the version of iOS the feds are seeking here, you can bet that any time the feds want info from a locked phone in the future, they would run to court arguing that "we know for a fact that Apple possesses a software tool that would enable us to unlock this phone," and thus that there is no additional burden from requiring them to use the software again.