IN THE APPLE CASE, A DEBATE OVER DATA HITS HOME

WASHINGTON — Three years ago, reeling [A1] from Edward J. Snowden’s

disclosure [A2] of the government’s vast surveillance programs [A3] and uncertain how
to respond, President Obama said he welcomed a vigorous [A4] public debate about
the wrenching [A5] trade-offs [A6] between safeguarding personal privacy and tracking
down [A7] potential terrorists.

“It’s healthy for our democracy,” he told reporters at the time. “I think it’s a sign of
maturity.”
But the national debate touched off [A8] this winter by the confrontation between the
Justice Department and Apple over smartphone security is not exactly the one Mr.
Obama had in mind.

Mr. Snowden’s revelations produced modest changes and a heightened [A9]

suspicion of the government’s activities in cyberspace. Because the issue now

centers on a device most Americans carry in their pockets, it is concrete and
personal in a way that surveillance by the National Security Agency never was.
Las confesiones hechas por el Sr. Snowden ocasionaron cambios ligeros y una…
Ya que este asunto se enfoca en un aparato que la mayoría de los
estadounidenses…,
The trade-offs [A10] seem particularly stark [A11] because they have been framed
around a simple question: Should Apple help the F.B.I. hack into an iPhone used by
a gunman [A12] in the massacre last December in San Bernardino, Calif.?

Law enforcement officials have been adamant [A13] they must be able to monitor the
communications of criminals. They received a vote of confidence from Mr. Obama on
Friday, when he said the “absolutist” position taken by companies like Apple is
wrong. But the pushback [A14] has been enormous.

In the month since a judge ordered Apple to comply [A15] with the F.B.I., the debate
has jumped from the tech blogs to the front pages of daily newspapers and nightly
[A16] newscasts. Supporters of the company’s position have held rallies [A17]

nationwide[A18] . Late-night comedians have lampooned government snoopers.

Timothy D. Cook, the usually publicity-shy Apple chief executive, pleaded his case
on “60 Minutes” last December. On Twitter, “#encryption” fills the screen with
impassioned debate on both sides.

“Discussing the case with my friends has become a touchy subject,” said Matthew
Montoya, 19, a computer science major at the University of Texas, El Paso. “We’re a
political bunch with views from all across the spectrum.”
“El discutir este caso con mis amigos se ha vuelto un tema delicado”, expresa
Matthew Montoya de 19 años, …
Like many of her friends, Emi Kane, a community organizer in Oakland, Calif.,
recently found herself arguing via Facebook with a family friend about the case. Ms.
Kane thought Apple was right to refuse to hack the phone; her friend, a waitress in
Delaware, said she was disgusted by Apple’s lack of patriotism.

After exchanging several terse messages, they agreed to disagree. “It was a hard
conversation,” Ms. Kane said. The novelist Russell Banks, who signed a letter to
Attorney General Loretta Lynch on behalf of Apple, said he had spoken with more
than a dozen people about the case just in the last week.

“It’s not just people in the tech industry talking about this,” Mr. Banks, the author of
“Affliction” and “The Sweet Hereafter,” said. “It’s citizens like myself.”

That may be because the Apple case involves a device whose least interesting
feature is the phone itself. It is a minicomputer stuffed with every detail of a person’s
life: photos of children, credit card purchases, texts with spouses (and nonspouses),
and records of physical movements.

Mr. Obama warned Friday against “fetishizing our phones above every other value.”
After avoiding taking a position for months, he finally came down on the side of law
enforcement, saying that using technology to prevent legal searches of smartphones
was the equivalent of preventing the police from searching a house for evidence of
child pornography.
“That can’t be the right answer,” he said at the South by Southwest festival in Texas,
even as he professed deep appreciation for civil liberties and predicted both sides
would find a way to cooperate. “I’m confident this is something that we can solve.”
“Esa no puede ser la respuesta correcta”, … “Estoy seguro que este es una asunto
que podemos resolver”.
But polls suggest the public is nowhere near as certain as Mr. Obama. In surveys,
Americans are deeply divided about the legal struggle between the government and
one of the nation’s most iconic companies. The polls show that Americans remain
anxious about both the threat of terrorist attacks and the possible theft of personal
digital information.

[A1]conmovido
[A2]divulgación/ declaración/ publicación
[A3]programa de vigilancia
[A4]rotundo/ enérgico
[A5]desgarrador
[A6]compensación/ intercambio/ equilibrio
[A7]localizar/ encontrar/ dar con
[A8]encendió/ provocó/ desató
[A9]más claro/ mayor/ aumentado/ incrementada
[A10]compensación/ intercambio/ equilibrio
[A11]claro/ crudo/ severo/ fuerte
[A12]terrorista/ atacante/ tirador
[A13]mantenerse firme/ inflexibles
[A14]retroceso/ hacer retroceder
[A15]acceder a una solicitud con/ acatar la orden
[A16]diario/ de todas las noches
[A17]carreras
[A18]a escala nacional/ a toda la nación