• kirklennon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    264
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    This headline is ridiculous; I expect better from Ars Technica. You “admit” to things you shouldn’t have done. In this case the government compelled Apple to disclose certain data and simultaneously prohibited Apple from disclosing the disclosure. Thanks to a senator’s letter, Apple is now free to disclose something that they previously wanted to disclose, about something they were forced to do in the first place.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s so telling, how good chat gpt is at creating click bait.

        Ask for 10 click bait titles to any essay. It’ll be better than your title.

        • penquin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          10 months ago

          Lemmy isn’t really that different, beside being decentralized and has less restrictions (and downvotes/upvotes don’t mean shit here). People are people and news outlets are the same.

      • shootwhatsmyname@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        We need a bot that puts a better title in the comments, or an automod bot that physically changes the titles to be plain

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      10 months ago

      yeah, it looks like most of the other new agencies are attributing it correctly as the government. IMO it’s the damn gag order that’s most damning. You will spy on them for us and tell no-one.

    • sramder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I actually scrolled straight to the bottom of the article to see if it was flagged as being “republished from another Condé Nast property.” Just hoping there was an excuse for Ars.

    • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      A letter from a senator doesn’t carry much legal force. From my understanding of the article, Apple claims they were prohibited from sharing this information, but a simple letter couldn’t overturn something like a legal order or court mandate. The change here doesn’t support the claim.

      It reads more like Apple chose not to disclose in order to avoid the ire of the DOJ, even though it would have been morally more correct to tell the public.