In case anyone shares my confusion: they aren't talking about unlocking in the sense of removing carrier restrictions, but rather in the sense of disabling the security features of the device to access the data stored on it.
I was similarly confused. While the HN title accurately reflects the Reuters title, I think it'd be reasonable to retitle the submission to something along the lines of "Apple: breaking encryption on devices running iOS 8 and newer 'would be impossible'", or something (point being to highlight that we're talking about the encryption issue, not carrier).
That's what I got from the article, the key was wiped because of X many tries so Apple can't "unlock" the data on the device (excluding everything backed up to apple cloud).
In the future they will use shady FinFisher iTunes and other exploits to grab the data then seize the phone.
iPhone user here, and my first thought upon reading the headline was "unlocking" in the sense of carrier locks. Given that Apple sells unlocked phones in the first place, my mind immediately switched to the actual meaning of the headline. But still, there was a moment of confusion.
iOS devices have a "lock screen" where to use the device you have to enter a passcode or password or fingerprint to gain access to the device. Usually if you pick up someone's phone this is the screen that you see.
Note the "slide to unlock" message at the bottom. If you asked most users what it means to unlock a phone, this is what they would think of, as they see it every day.
What possible citation could be better than the one provided? Apple has sold over 1 billion of these devices and they all share the same lock screen UI; 500,000 search results on Google pales in comparison as a citation.
Edit: I understand your point and agree that unlocking a device would not mean exactly the same thing to all people. I just don't agree that the parent needed an additional citation.
