giandaliajr
About
- Username
- giandaliajr
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 7
Reactions
Comments
-
Quote: Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 Actually, I think there is a good chance that this was a deliberate decoy by Apple. I wish we could make bets through appleinsider. That would sure make these discussions interesting. I'm not a big bel…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by delreyjones I'm not a 1L. I used to be married to one and then she became a prosecutor. Now I'm a widower so I can't get her opinion. My recollection is that motive matters: "Even a dog knows the difference betwee…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 The letter just claims one thing: that the object in question belongs to Apple. It could have been two tin cans connected by string, a sack of beans, or coffee mug with an Apple logo. Apple is not adm…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by delreyjones Can you tell us what Gizmodo's motive was in your opinion? You don't think it was profit? Enlighten us as to why they'd spend $5-$10K. Do you think they sincerely believed the phone belonged to the selle…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by halhiker This story just seems odd. Why would Apple let a kid (and yes a 27YO software engineer is a kid) off campus with a top secret device with explicit directives? You know, like don't leave it in a bar, dumbass.…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by delreyjones However, if it's really true that Gizmodo paid the finder $10K, I think they're both criminals and I hope the DA agrees. No fraud involved here. There was a buyer and seller in property that did not belo…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Bageljoey I think you are in your own RDF. 1--His argument is not that they are not hardware designers, but that they are not in competetion. That is, customers are not deciding between buying IBM servers or iPhone…