Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

To clarify my earlier comment, I wasn't taking a position one way or the other.

lawnchair_larry made a claim about "nobody credible" believing something. As a lay person in the field, I don't know who these credible people are. Therefore I asked whether lawnchair_larry could tell us who one or more of these credible people are, and where we can read more about what they believe to be true about the situation.



Asking lawnchair_larry to give you a complete list of everyone he considers credible is disingenuous.

As the other commenter stated, if someone thought that someone credible made that claim they could simply provide that source, which both (1) involves asymptotically less effort for everyone involved and (2) under reasonable assumptions is at least as effective.

“Sir, I’m going to need for you to list for me all the crimes you didn’t commit last Saturday.”


> Asking lawnchair_larry to give you a complete list of everyone he considers credible is disingenuous.

Implying that was asked seems disingenuous to me, but I assume that wasn't your intent.

What I see is a request for clarification, specifically asking for the sources from which a conclusion was drawn.

It's not a police raid. Relax.


How is he supposed to refer you to people not saying something?

This is most definitely a rather silly request.

Can you prove that magic doesn’t exist?


> How is he supposed to refer you to people not saying something?

That's not what I was asking for. I was asking him to refer me to credible people saying that they don't believe Apple was involved. Here is what he said:

> Nobody credible believes for a second that Apple was involved, for whatever it’s worth.

I thought perhaps he had read about credible people making this claim, or had some other way of knowing what these people believe. I was simply asking for more information, so as to further educate myself.

I believe that in the absence of any sources, this claim may suffer from the Argument to the People [1] and Argument from Authority [2] logical fallacies.

Full disclosure: I have a MacBook and an iPhone. I enjoy Apple products and respect their business model. And in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe that Apple wasn't involved. I just want to learn more about the subject from people who know more than me.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority


You seem to assume that “apple planted this backdoor” is a realistic enough claim that someone credible would be willing to waste their time on it.

Well, it isn’t.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: