I agree! It's been misused to mean things someone doesn't agree with too often :)
In this case we have been gettings tons of claims that what apple doing will see them charged with child porn felonies etc with almost no foundation.
We've also had lots of claims based on a failure to actually read about what apple is doing (ie, will scan all content not just that scheduled for upload to icloud etc).
Perhaps the wrong term, but it seemed rather dismissive of the rather valid concern that Apple won't take kindly to what they're doing and try to stop them.
Ok, Apple rarely admit they are wrong, and when they do, they tend to spin it heavily. I don’t think this meaningfully changes the primary message of my comment though.
I expect Apple has been hit with such warrants already, and this phrase is nothing but simple PR talk happily misinterpreted by the overenthusiastic airheads at BoingBoing.
You need to let this go. You're trying to argue something that everyone understood well at the time. Thousands of news stories followed up on every detail in that letter and it was very clear what Apple meant.
That's actually not what blinkingled said. They said that some people here are using it as marketing for Apple, not that Tim Cook or others at Apple intended for it to be taken that way.
"erroneously" is referring to his later claims about Apple still continuing to scan. I guess it's a poor choice of words, but I don't see much problems with that.
Your note about that domain is interesting though. I don't regularly use Apple devices, so I'm not particularly concerned by that anyways.
Eh, I think the article and title are really meant to drive "engagement."
Any company, individual, or government will discourage investigation. Sometimes, because they have something to hide, sometimes, because they want to avoid precedent, and sometimes, just because it's a big fat pain in the butt, and they have the resources to interfere.
I'm not saying that Apple is right or wrong, here; just that this particular thing isn't really something to get all worked up over. The people pushing this, have an agenda (as does Apple, or any corporation). They are framing the matter in terms that will fit their perspective.
To be pedantic, that wasn't an insinuation, it was an accusation. I also believe it is a false accusation, since Apple has many happy customers and employees on HN, but he is within the letter of the law.
I'm not loyal to Apple. I do like Gruber's writing though, so I was defending his use of the word 'truth'. I said what I thought it meant, including a related link to the concept on Wikipedia.
What are some examples in which Apple misrepresents customers?
In this case we have been gettings tons of claims that what apple doing will see them charged with child porn felonies etc with almost no foundation.
We've also had lots of claims based on a failure to actually read about what apple is doing (ie, will scan all content not just that scheduled for upload to icloud etc).
reply