CloudTalkin

maciekskontakt said:

ihatescreennames said:

AppleInsider said:

The sensor is in the base of the HomePod mini, next to where the power supply cable enters the unit, and is about the size of a grain of rice. Apple has not commented on its existence, and its HomePod mini technical specs do not list its presence.

This must be the spy chip that Bloomberg has been reporting on for so long!

Are you writing it from mainland China or just brainwashed locally? You know maybe you should start visiting cybercrime report places and open your eyes. One of them is place where even former organized crime groups members and security specialist are reporters and peopel interviewed. Just start reading therecord.media reports. You may learn something valuable about cybersecurity. But I bet you do not know that plugs in those advanced mobile devices have electronic chip in them that has to ID itself to device. It could also containing something else, but your imagination is in fact limited. How is your profiling data used by AI platform and what yo want to onow is your choice. One may watch at least "Social Dilemma" on Netflix to undrstand a t list a it more.

flydog said:

CloudTalkin said:

afterfxguru said:

The most likely answer is that it is to correct for how the audio is heard. Since temperature and humidity affect how sound is heard it makes great sense to put something like this in. 

That doesn't really make sense.  People have been making sound reproduction devices for more than a century and none (that I know of) employ temp and humidity sensors to affect the sound.  Your claim sounds a bit dubious, if I'm honest.  Perhaps you have more info to support it.  The most obvious reason it doesn't make sense?  The sensor is inactive so it couldn't be contributing to how sound is heard.  

This is most likely for a future Homekit elements like smart thermostat, humidifier, space heater, air conditioner, etc.

Temperature and humidity do affect sound waves, and not sure how you expect that people would have implemented that "a century" ago, but in any case the claim is still absurd.

dewme said:

CloudTalkin said:

afterfxguru said:

The most likely answer is that it is to correct for how the audio is heard. Since temperature and humidity affect how sound is heard it makes great sense to put something like this in. 

That doesn't really make sense.  People have been making sound reproduction devices for more than a century and none (that I know of) employ temp and humidity sensors to affect the sound.  Your claim sounds a bit dubious, if I'm honest.  Perhaps you have more info to support it.  The most obvious reason it doesn't make sense?  The sensor is inactive so it couldn't be contributing to how sound is heard.  

This is most likely for a future Homekit elements like smart thermostat, humidifier, space heater, air conditioner, etc.

I agree with the latter post and speculation that this sensor pair is most likely targeting a smart home related function, like feedback for a smart thermostat and HVAC. The first post is entirely correct that sound propagation is absolutely affected by temperature, humidity, and also atmospheric pressure. If you live fairly close to a highway or railroad tracks that you only notice at night when the temperature drops you know all about temperature related sound diffraction. However, I would not expect that temperature or humidity related diffraction would be significant enough to notice within the small listening area and volume that a HomePod Mini is designed to support. But who knows, without doing the math.

It's also possible that these sensors are used to prevent the device from being operated outside of the temperature and humidity specifications. But since it's not hooked up, whatever it may be used for is a mystery.

afterfxguru said:

The most likely answer is that it is to correct for how the audio is heard. Since temperature and humidity affect how sound is heard it makes great sense to put something like this in. 

Bombdoe said:

Can someone in the know clear up for me how a non-practicing entity would know the exact circuit design details of Apple's A-series and M-series chips to the level required to claim:  

"Each patent focuses on a particular aspect of circuit design for electronic devices like computers or smartphones. The '804 patent, for example, focuses on a concurrent serial interconnect within an integrated circuit device. Two of the patents focus on interconnect test units for circuits, and the '680 patent details a communications arrangement for packet data control."

How easy is it for the chip design details to be deciphered?