Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Oct 9, 2018 3:45:51 GMT -8
|
|
benoir
fire starter
*
Posts: 1,314
|
Post by benoir on Oct 9, 2018 4:41:06 GMT -8
It’s probably difficult to have a completer discussion about all things Apple/AAPL without considering political aspects. Politics is pervasive and it buffers against APPLE on all sides ultimately impacting AAPL’s price.
Would we be better off without political discussions or without discussion regarding politics? Or will they always become the same thing?
But yeah, Let’s make money.
|
|
|
Post by incorrigible on Oct 9, 2018 5:07:29 GMT -8
I see nothing wrong with some discussions that are politically related. Talk about tariffs is fine if it effects Apple and AAPL share price in some way, however, this inevitably digresses into statements regarding ones political beliefs that usually quickly escalate into name calling.
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on Oct 9, 2018 6:07:39 GMT -8
speaking of POLITICS............
GOOGLE IS EVIL..........
|
|
|
Post by macster on Oct 9, 2018 6:34:32 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by dmiller on Oct 9, 2018 6:52:00 GMT -8
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,181
|
Post by JDSoCal on Oct 9, 2018 8:43:31 GMT -8
Haha did anyone notice our old AFB friend Gregg Thurman was stirring the pot on PED's site? Hope he's got 25 cars again (does talking about other people's cars constitute car talk?).
If only Tim and Apple went politics-free.
|
|
bud777
fire starter
Posts: 1,352
|
Post by bud777 on Oct 9, 2018 9:56:35 GMT -8
I am a software guy, not hardware, so maybe someone here can address a question I have about this "spy chip". I saw the pictures of the chip and how small it was. It is easy to see how it could go unnoticed, but what puzzles me is "How do you affect a board by adding a chip to an existing board?" In order for the chip to function, doesn't it have to connect to the other circuits, which means the board had to be designed to expect the chip?. Someone intercepting the board could only add the chip if they has access to the process that produced the board. They would have to have produced, not just the chip, but an alternative board with circuits to interface to the chip. This seems much more difficult than simply adding a chip to a board as the article implies.
What an I missing? I kinda liked Bloomberg, I hate to write them off as a credible source
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by 4aapl on Oct 9, 2018 12:25:01 GMT -8
I am a software guy, not hardware, so maybe someone here can address a question I have about this "spy chip". I saw the pictures of the chip and how small it was. It is easy to see how it could go unnoticed, but what puzzles me is "How do you affect a board by adding a chip to an existing board?" In order for the chip to function, doesn't it have to connect to the other circuits, which means the board had to be designed to expect the chip?. Someone intercepting the board could only add the chip if they has access to the process that produced the board. They would have to have produced, not just the chip, but an alternative board with circuits to interface to the chip. This seems much more difficult than simply adding a chip to a board as the article implies. What an I missing? I kinda liked Bloomberg, I hate to write them off as a credible source The AppleInsider article made it sound like not the easiest way to hack the system, but I believe it said they put it on a sub-board, like a wifi daughterboard. When I take apart a system, whether it's a laptop, iMac, or desktop, the wifi and bluetooth chips are on separate little boards that just plug in to the main board, sort of like adding memory to the system. I could see how it would be a lot easier to add something there, than onto stuff Apple specifically designs and has built. But the article also questions if this really happened, even if it is possible.
|
|
|
Post by davidstevenson on Oct 9, 2018 13:10:19 GMT -8
I could see Apple (or any board designer) add a connection "socket" to a board to allow the manufacture to connect for diagnostics and/or quality assurance. Whether Apple did this, whether there was such a "socket" on the board, whether the boards passed into Apple's server farm after incoming inspection with such boards still attached, whether the boards had the "rogue" chip instead of the manufacturer's chip, etc. etc. seems unlikely to me. But anything is possible.
|
|