She said the robbers were bold taking her husband’s phone, but then giving it back because it wasn’t to their liking.
“They basically looked at that phone and was like ‘Oh, that’s an Android? We don’t want this. I thought it was an iPhone,’” she said.
where do these stories come from? did this uber driver get robbed, report it to the police, and feel so offended that his android phone got rejected by the robber that he decided to call up some news station about it? because i’m trying to process the train of thought here between the robbery and alleged rejection and this news story being published. all i can think is that some online news editor believed it would generate a lot of clicks, but i’m still stuck on how some robbery victim who got their phone rejected for being the wrong brand thought it might feel the need to contact a news station about it.
The reporter tracked down the victims and did an interview. Found out what happened and used the odd fact as a basis and title for the story.
Absolutely wild guess on this one, but if I had to:
The victims probably wanted to get the story out because of their frustration about getting robbed. Maybe they were asked what valuables were taken, so they listed out what items were taken and if there was any motive, and they might’ve said “they took my phone and tried to take my husband’s, but gave his phone back” and were asked why the robbers would give the phone back or asked about what was said.
Also doesn’t even make sense since iPhones (honestly most phones now) are so well known to be easily remotely bricked by the owner, that stealing it offers little to no benefits.
From what I understand, they can be disassembled, and some of their internal parts are valuable on the black market
Quite a few of the major parts are now serialised and have to be assigned/tied to a device through an Apple service system - I forget what it’s called - so that scenario is becoming less profitable as well.
Oh, you’re totally right. But there are still a couple of parts that don’t, and they are still somewhat profitable. There are also some parts that robbers can sell off because others don’t know about that program, and they make some money off that too. Also, some robbers don’t know about all of this, so it still provides some extra motive to rob still.
Perhaps the victim posted something on social media about the robbery, which was then picked up on by a journalist.
To be honest it is a rather bizarre situation to end up in, being rejected by a robber for not having good enough loot.
I thought iPhones where basically a brick if stollen.
they are, but many of their parts are valuable as after-market items, such as the screens and batteries.
How? They are all locked to that specific device. Installing a screen or battery from another iPhone will disable features on the iPhone it’s installed in. I’m surprised there’s still a market for that.
Parts are paired to devices, but some parts will still worked unpaired but with reduced functionality. On the iPhone 15 Pro for example, a transplanted screen will not have True Tone and auto-brightness.
There are plenty of unscrupulous phone repairers who will harvest parts from stolen phones and pass them off to unknowing customers.
they’re supposed to be or to have reduced functionality of black marketed parts like this. then again, one shouldn’t expect a technician who buys stolen parts to be scrupulous…
I did not think of that.
I’ve seen cases where the thieves demand you to unlock your phone at gunpoint before leaving, so they can do whatever before you get a chance to remotely brick it.
deleted by creator
