5 ms·

Kremlin surely is behind this psyOps attack to undermine the credibility of Western media. Trump. Both. China too. If Apple found no signs of hacking only tel

Kremlin surely is behind this psyOps attack to undermine the credibility of Western media. Trump. Both. China too. If Apple found no signs of hacking only tells us that their SIEM isn't good enough. This spy stuff is Inception IRL.

okket 8y ago
Sure. Completely unthinkable that journalists saw a "market moving" story [0] that passed the plausibility test in details, found some anonymous sources and went for it. [0] "Bloomberg News Pays Reporters More If Their Stories Move Markets" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18162440 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18162440
- bsder 8y ago
  Sure, completely unthinkable that the NSA and big companies are attempting to cover up a story of hacking and surveillance. <rolls eyes> This story has been out less than 72 hours? Most of them over a weekend. Let's let the researchers get back to work today and start actually looking for physical evidence. Personally, I'm MORE worried with all the denials rather than less. If there was nothing to the story, I would expect Apple to say "We don't know anything about this" and then simply ignore the ongoing kerfuffle--especially on a weekend. The fact that they seem to be in full on PR mode at the highest levels on a weekend is somewhat worrying.
  - unilynx 8y ago
    Apple is trying to position itself as the only major tech company that keeps your data private, and this story threatens to undermine that story. So no surprise the PR department is full at work. What else would you expect them to do ?
    - okket 8y ago
      One thing I learned from this Bloomberg story is, that the human mind seems hardwired to prefer conspiracy theories over facts and is very bad at taking probabilities in account.
      - dnomad 8y ago
        It's not the human mind, it's a particular ideology. What's at work here is an ideology that must find enemies, the more heinous the better, in order to justify its own heinous actions.
      - ElBarto 8y ago
        We don't have facts here, just competing claims. From what I've read such attack would be possible, and I think that if it happened no-one would acknowledge it. This allegedly happened 3 years ago so no-one is going to find physical evidence anyway. They key is that it would be possible so the important thing here is for everyone to take appropriate defensive measures.
        okket 8y ago
        > We don't have facts here, just competing claims. This is not a case of competing claims. Believing that publicly traded companies would vehemently lie instead of keeping silence or use weasel words is essentially preferring conspiracy theories. Presenting such a case without hard, verifiable evidence is ludicrous and only works because many people are susceptible for a bad company/bad government conspiracy narrative.
        ElBarto 8y ago
        Believing that publicly traded companies would not lie is rather naive. This allegedly happened 3 years ago so there aren't going to be any physical evidence anyway and everyone knows it.
        okket 8y ago
        > Believing that publicly traded companies would not lie is rather naive. You know that shareholders can sue the company if they lie publicly? That is the reason why they usually keep silent or use weasel words.
nil_pointer 8y ago
This is a ridiculous theory.

okket 8y ago

Sure. Completely unthinkable that journalists saw a "market moving" story [0] that passed the plausibility test in details, found some anonymous sources and went for it. [0] "Bloomberg News Pays Reporters More If Their Stories Move Markets" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18162440 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18162440

bsder 8y ago
Sure, completely unthinkable that the NSA and big companies are attempting to cover up a story of hacking and surveillance. <rolls eyes> This story has been out less than 72 hours? Most of them over a weekend. Let's let the researchers get back to work today and start actually looking for physical evidence. Personally, I'm MORE worried with all the denials rather than less. If there was nothing to the story, I would expect Apple to say "We don't know anything about this" and then simply ignore the ongoing kerfuffle--especially on a weekend. The fact that they seem to be in full on PR mode at the highest levels on a weekend is somewhat worrying.
- unilynx 8y ago
  Apple is trying to position itself as the only major tech company that keeps your data private, and this story threatens to undermine that story. So no surprise the PR department is full at work. What else would you expect them to do ?
  - okket 8y ago
    One thing I learned from this Bloomberg story is, that the human mind seems hardwired to prefer conspiracy theories over facts and is very bad at taking probabilities in account.
    - dnomad 8y ago
      It's not the human mind, it's a particular ideology. What's at work here is an ideology that must find enemies, the more heinous the better, in order to justify its own heinous actions.
    - ElBarto 8y ago
      We don't have facts here, just competing claims. From what I've read such attack would be possible, and I think that if it happened no-one would acknowledge it. This allegedly happened 3 years ago so no-one is going to find physical evidence anyway. They key is that it would be possible so the important thing here is for everyone to take appropriate defensive measures.
      - okket 8y ago
        > We don't have facts here, just competing claims. This is not a case of competing claims. Believing that publicly traded companies would vehemently lie instead of keeping silence or use weasel words is essentially preferring conspiracy theories. Presenting such a case without hard, verifiable evidence is ludicrous and only works because many people are susceptible for a bad company/bad government conspiracy narrative.
        ElBarto 8y ago
        Believing that publicly traded companies would not lie is rather naive. This allegedly happened 3 years ago so there aren't going to be any physical evidence anyway and everyone knows it.
        okket 8y ago
        > Believing that publicly traded companies would not lie is rather naive. You know that shareholders can sue the company if they lie publicly? That is the reason why they usually keep silent or use weasel words.

nil_pointer 8y ago

This is a ridiculous theory.