3 ms·
So interesting. With a year of reporting on this story Bloomberg has a LOT of unpublished info. If they are correct they should have a ton of information to ba
by jmull 8y ago
So interesting.
With a year of reporting on this story Bloomberg has a LOT of unpublished info. If they are correct they should have a ton of information to back up the claims in their story, including plenty of stuff to put the lie to some/many of the specific denials Apple has made.
Maybe they are waiting, to let Apple hang itself with strong, detailed, public proclamations. Then, bam! They publish all their proof, blowing up Apple's denials, forcing Cook and many other to resign, etc.
Or... they've actually got nothing. In that case they won't be able to refute Apple. Either they slink away, hoping everyone forgets, or issue a massively embarrassing retraction.
I'm fascinated to see what happens. I think we'll know in the next few weeks or months at the most.
- htk 8y agoThey might have nothing, but even so, celebrate.[1] [1]:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/04/23/bloomberg-celebrates-challenged-story-on-the-nsa-and-heartbleed-bug/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/04/...
- sooheon 8y agoLooks like a similar pattern and the author is the same as with this "Big Hack". But I don't see any hard evidence to say that Bloomberg is completely wrong, either. Just that NSA etc. have officially denied it (which you assume they would).