5 ms·

I'm surprised this wasn't discovered sooner. For a while, when I was working in Portland radio, there was an AM station that played recent indie releases on it.

I'm surprised this wasn't discovered sooner. For a while, when I was working in Portland radio, there was an AM station that played recent indie releases on it. Needless to say, while it was the butt of countless hipster jokes, there was a sizable crop of people with both AM radios and iPhones on them, frequently operating at the same time.

evgen 6y ago
It wasn't discovered because either it didn't happen or the person claiming such has a faulty device. The FCC would never allow these phones to be imported for sale if they were so sloppy in their emissions. The idea that there are millions of people out there listening to AM radio every day for hours at a time in cars and homes/offices in close proximity to iPhones but no one ever detected this before is laughable.
- SiempreViernes 6y ago
  Arguments by appeals to authorities like the FCC, CDC, or FAA sort of work if the authority can be trusted. For the argument to be coherent that trust must have been established by a proven track record of both employing the appropriate methods correctly and showing independence of vested interests in their reporting of the results.
  - evgen 6y ago
    Apparently you have no idea what you are talking about, so you think that these sorts of arguments work when discussing FCC emission testing. The FCC does not actually run the test, they set the standards. The tests themselves are run by various labs and testing agencies that are certified to perform the tests and who would be risking a very lucrative gig for the sake of cheating on a test for a device that will be widely deployed and certainly tested by third-parties who will want to examine the device. It is possible for some mid-range device to slip through or bribe someone to pass a test, but unlikely to the point of absurdity that this would be done for something like an iPhone.
    - SiempreViernes 6y ago
      Hilariously, this is what I found when searching for the public test results of the iphone8, apologies for it being about a previous generation, but happily your argument is insensitive to such details: https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-radiation-testing-20190821-72qgu4nzlfda5kyuhteiieh4da-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-... The summary of the above article is that yes: if you hold the phone sufficiently far away from the measuring device the detected radiation is below the levels mandated, and if someone else tries to test the emission for themselves Apple will say they did it wrong and refuse to give any explanation of what the error might be. A bullet proof system indeed.
      - evgen 6y ago
        Lol, 2mm. That is the distance this test used that you claim is some sort of support for your argument in this case. Sorry, but the only other corroborating evidence is a later claim made by a company that sells RF-shielded phone cases. I am going to have to chalk this one up to unclear guidelines (mis)interpreted by people who do not understand the square power law. Try again.
        glitcher 6y ago
        I feel like you may have very good points to contribute, but your dismissive and combative tone is kinda ruining it for me.
    - jimmySixDOF 6y ago
      wasn't there something about Voltswagen and emissions testing...
      - SiempreViernes 6y ago
        Hush you! Authorities are infallible! Just look at the good work from the FAA, whose regulation holds human lives in the balance.

evgen 6y ago

It wasn't discovered because either it didn't happen or the person claiming such has a faulty device. The FCC would never allow these phones to be imported for sale if they were so sloppy in their emissions. The idea that there are millions of people out there listening to AM radio every day for hours at a time in cars and homes/offices in close proximity to iPhones but no one ever detected this before is laughable.

SiempreViernes 6y ago
Arguments by appeals to authorities like the FCC, CDC, or FAA sort of work if the authority can be trusted. For the argument to be coherent that trust must have been established by a proven track record of both employing the appropriate methods correctly and showing independence of vested interests in their reporting of the results.
- evgen 6y ago
  Apparently you have no idea what you are talking about, so you think that these sorts of arguments work when discussing FCC emission testing. The FCC does not actually run the test, they set the standards. The tests themselves are run by various labs and testing agencies that are certified to perform the tests and who would be risking a very lucrative gig for the sake of cheating on a test for a device that will be widely deployed and certainly tested by third-parties who will want to examine the device. It is possible for some mid-range device to slip through or bribe someone to pass a test, but unlikely to the point of absurdity that this would be done for something like an iPhone.
  - SiempreViernes 6y ago
    Hilariously, this is what I found when searching for the public test results of the iphone8, apologies for it being about a previous generation, but happily your argument is insensitive to such details: https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-radiation-testing-20190821-72qgu4nzlfda5kyuhteiieh4da-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-... The summary of the above article is that yes: if you hold the phone sufficiently far away from the measuring device the detected radiation is below the levels mandated, and if someone else tries to test the emission for themselves Apple will say they did it wrong and refuse to give any explanation of what the error might be. A bullet proof system indeed.
    - evgen 6y ago
      Lol, 2mm. That is the distance this test used that you claim is some sort of support for your argument in this case. Sorry, but the only other corroborating evidence is a later claim made by a company that sells RF-shielded phone cases. I am going to have to chalk this one up to unclear guidelines (mis)interpreted by people who do not understand the square power law. Try again.
      - glitcher 6y ago
        I feel like you may have very good points to contribute, but your dismissive and combative tone is kinda ruining it for me.
  - jimmySixDOF 6y ago
    wasn't there something about Voltswagen and emissions testing...
    - SiempreViernes 6y ago
      Hush you! Authorities are infallible! Just look at the good work from the FAA, whose regulation holds human lives in the balance.