Replies

> “No, the anons have it completely WRONG again. Hong Kong is still technically NOT part of China for economic trade.”

Splitting hairs. HK is known as the SAR of PRC-China.

The rest of your detail seems also to tend toward splitting hairs, arguing for the sake of arguing.

Your tables do not match with your text argument. Your supposition that Apple already had complete access is a static rather than a dynamic view. The PRC is expected to grant access on a model-by-model basis; it is not a forever carte blanche access, rather a time-varying, case by case, event by event, to be revisited authorization. What is accessible this year may not be automatically accessible next year without some sit-down at the table negotiating.

It is entirely plausible the PRC Chinese want further apple models to allow for blocking or piercing VPNs. The news in that part of the world of governments and VPNs is not part of some anti-Apple ‘lie’ as it is applicable to all makes and models from all manufacturers. Circumventing VPNs makes for a focus on the general Cloud (server farms and satellite relays) including the iCloud. The news items are not always precise but are accurate enough to convey that China wants spy capability. I know from experience in many areas of business that the PRC-Chinese are not to be trusted. With high pro9bability one can infer that any such capability created for the PRC will come with a counter-intel ability.

Now that’s all the time I will devote to Apple discussions as I remember how you tend to be argumentative to the extreme with respect to Apple. However, you’ve done a very good job of creating and maintaining a Q-glossary. It’s appreciated. Keep it up. As for Apple arguments, find a lamp post.