Why does Ars Technica, a website that is devoted exclusively to technology related news, feel the need to interject themselves into non-technology political issues? I can understand net neutrality, that's at least tech related. But this, what does the AMA's position on guns and assault weapons have to do with technology?? Am I missing something here?
arstechnica.com
Other urls found in this thread:
I stopped reading fudzilla because nick got political and started larping for Hilary.
Presumably they feel obliged to cover it as journalists. With that said, both their opinions and those of doctors are irrelevant in the matter. One of the worst parts is the comment section having down and uprate systems. It's a worthless Web 2.0 holdover that appears, especially in this context, to serve no purpose other than to act as a mechanism to ridicule unpopular opinions. A poll would be a better method.
Gun Violence is technology.
just look at who owns arstechnica and that's all you need to know
FUCK ars
look at the comments on every crypto-related ars article
it infuriates me to no end, how are these people THIS retarded?
Because it's owned by Condé Nast. Stop visiting it if you don't like it's content, fucking retard.
>it's content
>it's
>'
>calls others retarded
kys, dumb bitch
Easy.
I suspect a handful of accounts are opposition controlled that feed into whatever the MSM narrative of the month is about crypto. Right now it is a bunch of virtue signaling about the electricity usage. And then there's the handful of people/bots that purport that it cannot ever be a currency because it is unregulated and volatile.
this. there is no fucking way they all have the same opinion and just spamvote the shitty bluepilled comments
>why does Jow Forums, a board that is devoted exclusively to politics-related discussion, feel the need to go to other boards and interject themselves into non-political discussion? I can understand crossposting, that's at least a Jow Forums phenomenon. But the absolute state of other boards when Jow Forumsposters arrive. What does being a cuck and their obsession with the BBC have to do with boards that aren't Jow Forums?? Am I missing something here?
by the same logic, what does your post have to do with technology?
exactly this. good analogy. you see op's point, you dumb soiaboy
>the ironing
>There are some decent ones left like toms, anandtech, and phoronix
This
Phoronix is nice
Another good one is theregister
Left but top notch humour
I'm about a dozen of those fud posters. I'm just trying to catch a dip famalam
OP didn't mention anything about "cucks" or other boards, it's a simple question related to one of the largest and most influential tech news sites on the planet. They are clearly pushing a political agenda for a topic that has nothing to do with technology and they should be called out for it.
>Why does Ars Technica, a website that is devoted exclusively to technology related news, feel the need to interject themselves into non-technology political issues?
because they are faggits
Well like most websites of significant size these days, they don't actually give much of a shit about what their nominal purpose - tech news - entails. They're a "content producer", and who gives a damn what the content is so long as it draws in clicks and eyeballs and browser fingerprints that advertisers will pay for. This dynamic eventually comes to control pretty much any ad-funded site. And in the modern world politics happens to be one of the most potent forms of clickbait.
Is this depressing? Yes, it is. I once heard it compared to a baker dumping sawdust in the muffin batter, because you get more muffins that way, and what good are the damn things except to be sold on at a markup to whatever rubes will buy them? Ideally we'd have bakers who care about actually making good muffins. Those get driven out of the market by profit-maximizers, though. If you want a solution to this, it's to kill the ad-funded web. Next time you fix a normie's computer or router, give them an ad-blocker.
That's a good point. It's almost like they're playing with people's emotions to get more clicks/traffic which in turn produces more ad money. That almost seems unethical in a way.
Owners arstechnica
en.wikipedia.org
>Am I missing something here?
Merely a coincidence, goy
jesus fuck, i tried reading the comments on that article and had to stop before i punched a hole in my monitor. Now i remember why i refuse to read any online article on controversial political issues.
Even the comments just pointing out that this crap isnt tech related got downvoted to hell
Because Ars Technica is run by SJWs who want to restrict your personal freedoms. Are Technica is pro censorship and has dishonest articles where the author slyly recommends you buy things made by their Twitter buddies.
Stop reading their shit. Stop supporting them.
Using technology, they proved gun fetishists are retarded.
>what does the AMA's position on guns and assault weapons have to do with technology
Medicine is science guns are technology. Ars covers news about science and technology.
Ars knows most of its reader base due to pervasive violation of their privacy. Like most journalists, they pander and bait to get more clicks.
But now I want a dark gun with a high-capacity magazine and a terrifying Russian or German name.
Could it be because they are owned by Condé Naste (same company that owns reddit)?
hmm
Because the technical people, the ones who truly cared about technology in a way that had little to do with consumerism already left to do more important things with their time. One of the founders of ars would go deep into chip design and other topics back in the day. No one there has his depth of knowledge. It's the same thing that happened to Anand from anandtech. That guy works at Apple now.
Never be the smartest guy in the room, etc, etc. The good ones leave because they're good and can do better. We're left with the ones who are stuck there and can't do better.
For the past year or so I've been wondering where to get my tech news now and I'm coming to find that trolling through IEEE papers, Nature journals and arxiv may be my only answer.
Fuck.
The cpu guy was Jon Stokes. He knew his shit.