On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 12:51:37 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:
> Actually it was Bloomberg that came out with the story first.
Hi JF Mezei,
As usual, when I break the news to Apple users, all I care about are facts.
Since you're not an Apple Apologists, we can speak with you like an adult.
It's good that you understood that the original post is 100% factual, as
all my posts are.
Apparently Apple asked Bloomberg not to publish the story, but Bloomberg
did anyway, where Apple's statement was a year in the making, and which was
provided to Bloomberg _before_ Bloomberg published their story.
At the moment, Apple says they were infected, but only once, while
Bloomberg seems to indicate a wider scope than Apple has yet admitted to.
Time will tell, where the comments are equally strong from each party,
hence, for example, sentient adults will have to make their own judgment on
the patently false statements, for example, this one:
"A spokesperson for China's foreign ministry told Bloomberg
that the country is a defender of cybersecurity."
<
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-amazon-deny-report-that-chinese-spy-chips-infiltrated-their-hardware/>
> And it wasn't just Apple who quickly provided a response showing the
> article was bogus, Amazon and Supermicro also did. All debunked the idea
> that they had reported this to FBI and that there was an investigation.
Actually, Apple yesterday admitted to at least one infection...
"That one-time event was determined to be accidental and not a
targeted attack against Apple," the iPhone maker was quoted as saying."
> The real question is why Bloomberg ran with this story knowing it was
> false. I smell political pressure to smear China.
I agree with you that Bloomberg published a story that they _knew_ would be
refuted by Apple, but you have to admit that Apple has been caught in some
really big public lies (e.g., the unsigned letter "explaining" why they
secretly throttled CPUs).
The main difference here, is that for once, Apple *signed* the letter,
where it's as telling as chocolate all over a child's face that Tim Cook
blatantly publicly lied multiple times about the CPU throttling issues.
The fact is that Apple is clearly not above a blatantly public lie.
Hence nothing Apple ever says can be trusted since we know they lie.
The question is really whether Bloomberg is more trustworthy or not.
> Normally, one would never release the fact that some national defense
> depatrtment bought servers from company X. Yet, somehow Bloomberg got
> that info and allowed to release it.
All I care about are the facts.
Everything below is a direct quote from the reference above.
"The Bloomberg story noted that six current and former senior national
security officials offered details of the discovery of the chips and a
government investigation into the matter."
"We stand by our story and are confident in our reporting and sources," a
Bloomberg News spokesperson said in a statement provided to CNET.