“Billionaire Warren Buffett declined to take sides in Apple’s tussle with the FBI over an iPhone related to the San Bernardino mass shooting,” Don Reisinger reports for Fortune. “But he said that ‘privacy has its limits.'”

“In an interview on CNBC on Monday, Buffett said that ‘we live in a very, very, very dangerous world,’ adding that if law-enforcement officials hear of a ‘major’ threat that is credible and could cause a catastrophe, ‘I think that in that case, security trumps privacy,'” Reisinger reports. “Buffett did, however, hedge his comments a bit, saying that if the issue is neither major nor one of national security, ‘then privacy trumps security.'”

MacDailyNews Take: Who gets to define “major?”

“‘But in the end, if there’s something major, something that the Attorney General or the head of the FBI would be willing to sign and go to a judge on and say ‘we need this information and we need it now,’ I’d be willing to trust that official to behave in a proper manner,’ he said, suggesting that he might support the FBI in this case,” Reisinger reports. “But before he was done, Buffett made a few things clear: He’s not a technologist, he doesn’t necessarily understand all facets of the argument, and perhaps most importantly, he holds Apple’s CEO in high regard. ‘I admire Tim Cook enormously,’ Buffett said. ‘I respect him as much as any CEO in the country.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Stick to your knitting, Warren.

Again, encryption is either on or off. This is a binary issue. There is no in-between. You either have encryption or you do not.

There have been people that suggest that we should have a back door. But the reality is if you put a back door in, that back door’s for everybody, for good guys and bad guys. — Apple CEO Tim Cook, December 2015

This is not about this phone. This is about the future. And so I do see it as a precedent that should not be done in this country or in any country. This is about civil liberties and is about people’s abilities to protect themselves. If we take encryption away… the only people that would be affected are the good people, not the bad people. Apple doesn’t own encryption. Encryption is readily available in every country in the world, as a matter of fact, the U.S. government sponsors and funs encryption in many cases. And so, if we limit it in some way, the people that we’ll hurt are the good people, not the bad people; they will find it anyway. — Apple CEO Tim Cook, February 2016

Oppose government overreach.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Manhattan D.A. claims Apple is crippling investigations across the country – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Apple’s top lawyer: U.S. government order weakens security for all iPhones – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Tim Cook can probably defy the US government all he wants and not go to jail – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook picks up where Snowden left off in privacy debate – February 29, 2016
Obama administration set to expand sharing of data that N.S.A. intercepts – February 28, 2016
If Apple loses, your home could be the next thing that’s unlocked: Access to your security cameras would be just a judge order away – February 28, 2016
The Apple vs. FBI fight is about something more basic than software and laws – February 28, 2016
Apple privacy battle with Washington looms as watershed moment – February 26, 2016
Apple’s lawyer: If we lose, it will lead to a ‘police state’ – February 26, 2016
Apple: The law already exists that protects us from U.S. government demands to hack iPhone – February 26, 2016

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn Weiler” for the heads up.]