It is a worthwhile question to ask "why is the foreign intelligence service funding a private company?"

It's worth reading the article and understand "funding" in this case means "they bought NeXT computers like everyone else who bought a NeXT...they just bought a lot of them". This is an article about commerce, not covert activities, other than "we're going to use the computers we bought for things we're not going to tell you about".

Strange comment. The comment you're replying to is pointing out that the CIA bought computers for its own use. Am I confused and they also "provided funding" other than buying computers?

You're reading their comment in isolation. The thread starts with "I assumed something completely different."

You replied to a "still, good to ask in order to seek clarity" type point.

Comment hierarchy is part of the overall context.

Another strange comment, this time from an account made 15 hours ago. My entire point was contextual and not in isolation!

There's no conspiracy, I think people just disagree with what "funding" can mean. A bulk sale in the realm of ~20,000 units is equivalent to stakeholder funding when you're at NeXT's scale. It doesn't inherently mean that anything nefarious happened, but there was a B2B contract written up with the feds, and Jobs accepted it.

The root comment is a perfectly valid question. Since the government wanted to replace the guts with custom Motorola/Intel parts, it's a bit weird that they'd single-out NeXT to sell them an off-the-shelf shell. I'm guessing that Steve's number was in a lot of government Rolodexes after Michael Dell and the others.

Since the government wanted to replace the guts with custom Motorola/Intel parts

Or they wanted to plug a couple of NuBus coprocessor boards in.

Sure, and that would be a reasonable thing to reply to the main comment here, but the actual comment was just muddying the waters and a total non sequitur, as written.

ai bots on hn? naaaaa.....

[deleted]
[deleted]

This is AI. I can see the signature in what it thinks good argument looks like @seizethecheese

The levels of clickbait in that headline are absurd. It's like seventh hell of clickbait.

Also it doesn't come from the source. WSJ headline is: “The Hidden Debt That Apple Owes to the CIA”

So someone's running experiments of some sort on HN, driven by AI, is my read. Hope they snub that shit out.

Welcome to our collective future; enjoy your stay.

At least we can still spot the deception. That won't last forever.

The CIA and NSA have provided money to a lot of private companies, including Signal. They have multiple startup funding programs. Nothing special about it, they expect to benefit from what the company will research or sell. It’s not necessarily with strings attached

No, but it's always with an aligned agenda.

When the CIA funneled money to modernist artists, they weren't expecting spy devices in paintings. They're waging a cultural war.

Is signal funded to put backdoors? Maybe, but probably not. It's probably something more vague - A tool for anti-gov actors in countries that are our enemies, or to sell us all the idea that we are able to freely communicate while our devices are tapped by other means.

Yes-ish. I think there is also the element that an agency as massive and well funded as the CIA is not that far from being its own mini-state, and one way to use the budget (because it has to be used!) is to fund projects that might be useful or provide some form of return in the future, even if it’s just good for the CIA public image, or a way to attract and develop a network of talents

[dead]

A guy from the CIA told me that they bought a ton of early sun boxes to keep them afloat, seeing American-made technology as a key national security interest.

He signed the visitor log as working for 'the company'. The CIA bit was a well-trod inference.

[dead]

[deleted]