4 ms·
> But his writing is overwhelmingly pro-Apple. ... > I'd probably be as inclined to believe the source as I would Apple's public response. In turn, I say thi
by raganwald 17y ago
> But his writing is overwhelmingly pro-Apple.
...
> I'd probably be as inclined to believe the source as I would Apple's public response.
In turn, I say this: You are given two statements: One is a written and formal statement from Apple to the FCC. It's on record. If information comes to light in the future that contradicts this statement all h*ll will break loose for the company.
The other is from Gruber claiming that some anonymous person claimed something to the contrary of Apple's statement.
Given the two, you are inclined to believe someone who Gruber claims claims something. Where do you think you fit on a continuum from pro-Apple to neutral to anti-Apple?
- pyre 17y agoHe could just be anti-corporation/anti-'the man'
- raganwald 17y agoAh, the general case. I can go along with this, I lean that way by nature as well. That being said, I recognize a flaw in my argument: I'm presenting a false dichotomy. In a case like this it's also quite acceptable to disbelieve Apple and the "little birdie."
- raganwald 17y agoHindsight is 20/20: http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/google_voice_story_wrong http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/google_voice_story_wrong
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]