Hacker News Reader

Cingular, not AT&T. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2007/01/09Apple-Chooses-Cingu...

This is bizarre. After you pointed out my error, I went to Wikipedia to verify before saying anything more. I was wrong originally; you, me, and your link all know it. But Wikipedia says it was AT&T that first carried the iPhone [0]. I assume it's because AT&T bought Cingular, but it feels off not noting that it was branded under Cingular instead of the separate (at the time) AT&T.

It's an eerie feeling finding errors or omissions in what is commonly used as an irrefutable source of truth in the modern world. I appreciate the correction though!

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility#iPhone

It is shocking to me that anyone would consider Wikipedia as an irrefutable source of truth.

If I'm at a bar and want to settle something lighthearted between friends, Wikipedia is the source of choice. If it's worth delving deeper, we'll go deeper, but for a quick answer I trust Wikipedia more than saying "Hey Google, which network was the first iPhone exclusive to?"

Perhaps irrefutable is too strong a word, but if I'm looking for an answer (instead of researching a topic) and want a quick, single source, Wikipedia is my go-to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com