Re: Nate Amsden
Okay. I'm not sure what we're arguing over here.
Edit: BTW we're not saying anyone should upgrade or accept new services - just pointing out Comcast's latest bid to reverse the cord-cutting trend among its subscriber base.
C.
3533 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Sep 2011
I get what you're saying, and if you don't need the high speed stuff then this is irrelevant to you. I pay Comcast for 50Mbps broadband with no TV service, and get nowhere near that speed. Plus I'm basically paying about the same as 50Mbps+TV anyway thanks to Comcast slowly ratcheting up the price and me not having the time nor energy to complain.
Anyway: you can look at this – Comcast offering faster speeds if you get a TV package – as Comcast offering free TV if you get faster speeds. And you might be cool with that.
But I suspect subscribers who just want decent broadband without TV will be a little cheesed off at this renewed push for TV. Just give us the damn internet, please.
C.
Yeah, looks as though Google couldn't get through to AWS Route53 during the hijack, so stopped resolving things.
C.
The Meltdown + Spectre stuff was kinda weird. We saw big changes to the Linux kernel for what otherwise was billed as a KASLR bypass. It didn't make much sense. A well-placed source confirmed the Windows kernel was undergoing similar changes. Then an AMD engineer referenced a speculative execution bug.
Then all the pieces fit together. It helped that some of us had written low-level MMU code. We were, back in the day, in the trenches battling firmware and kernel bugs, and knew the upcoming changes pointed to a microprocessor architecture flaw that derailed the assurances of the CPU memory access protection circuitry.
So we contacted Intel, Microsoft and others for comment ahead of time. Everyone stonewalled us. So, welp, might as well let the world know Linux + Windows kernels were undergoing massive changes internally due to an apparent chipset flaw. The rest is history.
FWIW Intel has now hired an external PR firm to handle El Reg. And they are professional, former wire reporters, and push to get our questions answered, which is appreciated.
C.
Yeah, there are a ton of embargoes in the tech world. Some other journos might be given new gadgets to review under embargo to a certain date - usually the launch date, so when the announcement goes out, all the reviews go live.
The whole thing can be icky if you're essentially propelling a marketing campaign.
Do we do stuff under embargo? Not going to bullshit you: yes, from time to time. Real example: a chip company has a day or two of technical briefings on architecture features and designs, under embargo that lifts a week later. That gives hacks a week to write a decent technical deep-dive, ask questions, get answers, without trying to rush and race each other to be first. Generally, it produces better technical pieces if the writer is careful to leave out the spin + marketing claims.
Another real example: a vulnerability is found, journalist is tipped off with an embargo that lifts when the fix is out. No point dropping a zero-day on the world when there's no exploit code in the wild. Better to reveal the flaw when a patch is ready, unless it is under active attack - in which case, the cat is out the bag and ppl need to be alerted to mitigations and threats.
If you're the kind of journo who feels obliged to kiss a vendor's ass because it gave you a heads up, you'll get more stuff under embargo and do more ass kissing. If you're like El Reg and, in the words of a PR at one big IT name, "go off script all the time", then you tend not to get invited to embargoed launches, etc.
So, yeah, we do some stuff under embargo if it makes a better package for readers, not to suit someone's marketing launch.
Another real example: an El Reg vulture was told under embargo that a mid-level IT supplier was about to buy a startup. Then the embargo was pushed back a few days, then again to a yet-to-be-decided date, meaning the story couldn't run at all without breaking the embargo. The vulture separately learned of the acquisition through two other sources, while the companies were stalling and ironing out the press announcement stuff.
So, we broke the embargo and ran the story early based on the separate info we got. We weren't going to let a now vague embargo put the kibosh on reporting. Embargoes are informal deals, not legal agreements. If you break them, you don't get them again. Sometimes that's no bad thing.
PS: The footie embargoes are for newspaper print and evening telly deadlines. If a player gives a set of interviews for the next morning's papers or that night's sports shows, they all agree to hold back the coverage until the agreed time so that it's not a rushed frenzy free for all.
Embargoes can be useful for logistics and giving ppl time to prepare a decent package. Relying on embargoed info or falling into the trap of helping a multinational make more money, not so much.
C.
Yup – we cocked up in the rush to the pub on a Friday. Funny story: if you plug "438.318 BTC in USD" into Google, it treats that as 438,318 BTC, hence the massive number in the story.
It was caught and fixed up as soon as it was spotted. If you see anything wrong, please let us know by email straight away so it can be address: drop a note to corrections@theregister.com. Ta.
C.
Yes, as the GWR person explained, people were reusing passwords from other websites, which were hacked and their login details presumably leaked to the dark web, allowing crooks to gain access to their GWR accounts.
Let's say you use mycheapbikesexample.com to buy bicycle stuff, and GWR.com, with the same username and password pair. And mycheapbikesexample.com gets hacked and the username and password database stolen. If crooks can figure out your username-password combo from that DB, they can try it on other sites and eventually log in as you, on GWR.com, if you've reused your credentials.
It's called credential stuffing, it's automated these days, and it's why you should use a unique password per-site and also two-factor authentication.
C.
We're not in Shoreditch. We're using WeWork in Sydney, San Francisco and London (Gray's Inn Road, Camden).
In each location, we have our own private walled-off offices with our own desks, phones, Ethernet, etc, adjoining a shared space that has stuff like coffee, tea, biscuits/cookies, beer, cider, wine, kitchen, sofas, etc.
Well, except in California. They took away our alcohol :(
C.
"Wait, so you guys actually earn less on non-IT stories?"
The Bootnotes are a bit of fun. They're not the focus of our ad team. They're not even a traffic driver - stuff like cloud services going wrong, scandals, security cockups, operating system bugs, and so on, bring in the millions of netizens.
"And if you get just a bit too raunchy, those big advertisers will shy away"
That's not how it works. We sell ad space next to IT stories to IT vendors and providers. These companies want to reach technology workers, and show off their wares and solutions to folks in the industry, so that's why they direct their advertising there. Sometimes, advertisers will run their ads across the whole site. It's really up to them.
The Bootnotes are a side channel of amusement. Advertisers know these off-topic stories are part of the site's charm and heritage. If you're flogging an SDN switch, you probably want that to appear next to networking articles for maximum relevant eyeballs. OTOH you might want to run your ad sitewide. Whatever the advertiser and our ad team strike a deal on; us journalists aren't thinking about it.
C.
"Allegedly titillating articles like this one draw in a much larger crowd of eyeballs, enhancing ad revenues greatly"
This is a common misconception. Our main advertising is aimed at people coming to read the enterprise IT tech stuff. Ads that run alongside Bootnotes are mainstream and thus low CPM. We do Bootnotes stories to offer some light amusement, and keep to our tabloid roots.
C.
"Just what has this News got to do with Technology or Science?"
Nothing, which is why it's in Bootnotes. Bootnotes are off-topic fun for writers who need a break from writing about computers, software, bugs, companies, and other tech stuff. There is more to life than IT, and we're happy to provide some light relief for readers who don't want to stare at specifications.
Amusingly, I think you're the same Stuart who ran the Acorn Cybervillage way back in the day, when I ran Acorn news site Drobe, and we clashed even back then.
C.
"Isn't this mostly what you'd expect?"
Yes, but the point is: don't let old stereotypes interfere with your future code's decisions.
Also, it's an interesting way to study how stereotypes have changed over time.
"I'd be more interested in if anything has actually changed over the years."
Oh Jesus. That's like, half the story explaining it has. Does anyone read the articles?
C.
"huh odd how you didn't mention female wearing headscarf. almost as if you were afraid of providing description."
We've been providing updates throughout the afternoon as soon as we were able to confirm them, rather than spread rumor and gossip. We've included details of the suspected shooter.
"also. no fatalities as of this time. odd how that wasn't in article either."
One fatality: the gunwoman. And other injuries were reported accurately.
C.
LOHAN was overseen by long-term El Reg staffer Lester Haines.
As far as I understand/can recall: the device used a rocket motor that couldn't be legally launched in Europe, so it had to go to the United States for firing. It required a permit from the US aviation watchdog, the FAA, however officials couldn't decide how to classify it - whether it was a drone or a rocket.
They were busy rewriting the rules for drones at the time, and seemed hesitant to make a decision before the new regulations were approved, which had all sorts of politics attached to it. So LOHAN was somewhat lost in federal government's bureaucracy.
In 2016, Lester died, dealing us all a blow in more ways than one. The project has been in stasis since, although not forgotten. We've got our hands on the kit again. There may be movement soon.
C.
I absolutely hate this. Absolutely hate it. People are freaking out about Drupal 6, when the security team officially supports 7 and 8. I'm seeing all sorts of links to weird pages claiming they have patches for D6. I absolutely hate the idea of sending people to unofficial security fixes. The damage possible is obvious.
I think I've got the patch link right now. Should be this one https://www.drupal.org/node/2955130
Use entirely at your own risk.
C.
Generally not a great idea to state without caveats that a company has stolen IP from another company when they settled out of court.
99.99% they are not going to sue over an article comment, but it's always the ones you least suspect that end up triggering a legal headache.
C.
The point we were trying to make is that although Vettel was technically in the lead, he had yet to pit so wasn't really 1st. Due to the timing cockup for Hamilton, Vettel was able to unexpectedly secure that lead.
I've tweaked the piece to make it clearer.
Don't forget to email corrections@theregister.com if you spot anything wrong - those go to the top of our todo list, whereas we don't have time to check every comment.
C.
The point we were trying to make is that although Vettel was ahead of Hamilton, the Ferrari driver had yet to pit so wasn't really 1st. However, due to the timing cockup, Vettel was able to maintain pole position anyway.
I've tweaked the article to make it clearer.
Don't forget to email corrections@theregister.com if you spot anything you think is wrong. We see those instantly, whereas we don't have time to read through every comment - there are thousands a month.
C.
From the linked-to statement:
"Equifax was able to identify approximately 2.4 million U.S. consumers whose names and partial driver's license information were stolen, but who were not in the previously identified affected population discussed in the company's prior disclosures about the incident."
HTH
C.