3 ms·

So many obvious questions are unanswered in the article: 1. What does a pocket heater do in general terms? (Saying that it has something to do with "coating on

So many obvious questions are unanswered in the article: 1. What does a pocket heater do in general terms? (Saying that it has something to do with "coating one substance with a very thin film of another" is pretty thin.) 2. Why did they target him, and how did they get his emails? 3. So the blueprints weren't of a pocket heater. Then what were they blueprints of? The story would be much better if they explained those. If the New York Times doesn't know, they should at least say something like, "We asked the prosecutors, but they refused to tell us".

tdaltonc 11y ago
It sounds like a tool for CVD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition
natch 11y ago
Yes unanswered, and as you suggest later, even unasked... if even the NYT is this pathetic then that just underscores that journalism is still ripe for disruption. Also it's bizarre they don't mention the case of Wen-Ho Lee, who earlier became a scapegoat for leaks at US nuclear sites, in part due to shoddy reporting by the NYT itself, which they later unwound in a still misstatement-ridden long article: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/04/us/the-making-of-a-suspect-the-case-of-wen-ho-lee.html http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/04/us/the-making-of-a-suspect... /vent
- cinquemb 11y ago
  That's the high quality NYT for you… I hope we see more high quality investigative journalism like this on HN! /sarc I think the only good thing about these type of whitewash pieces on HN (of which I don't even bother to click on) are the comments here that do the work of the journalists… but NYT history is pretty suspect when it comes to things surrounding corporate and government reporting so that's not surprising.
- wfo 11y ago
  I agree with you about the quality of this article, but I find it odd that for many people here and in SV culture, the moment anything in any industry behaves in a way which you don't approve of or don't understand it's immediately "ripe for disruption". Maybe journalism is just genuinely hard and there are plenty of very smart people working hard at NYT but it isn't always perfect, and "disrupting" the industry -- a weasel word which means nothing except "I am a libertarian and I support new things so long as they completely exterminate a non-libertarian established power structure" -- isn't smart, possible, helpful, or in fact any of the three.
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  > * if even the NYT is this pathetic then that just underscores that journalism is still ripe for disruption.* As far as I can tell, "disruption" is about doing things faster, punchier, shinier, on tighter margins and with a shorter turn-around time. Do you think that's going to produce better journalism? There are worse things that the sometimes-slipshod NYT. I'm frightened of what comes next for journalism.
  - natch 11y ago
    Having had a very up-close view of some stories NYT covered, I'd say they are doing horse-trading with the government in selected cases, where they pull certain punches in exchange for access. This is the kind of thing I would expect from them, but not from a player like firstlook.org / The Intercept, for example. Sure they are a special case because they have some deep pocket backers, but that's at least one example of better.

tdaltonc 11y ago

It sounds like a tool for CVD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition

natch 11y ago

Yes unanswered, and as you suggest later, even unasked... if even the NYT is this pathetic then that just underscores that journalism is still ripe for disruption. Also it's bizarre they don't mention the case of Wen-Ho Lee, who earlier became a scapegoat for leaks at US nuclear sites, in part due to shoddy reporting by the NYT itself, which they later unwound in a still misstatement-ridden long article: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/04/us/the-making-of-a-suspect-the-case-of-wen-ho-lee.html http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/04/us/the-making-of-a-suspect... /vent

cinquemb 11y ago
That's the high quality NYT for you… I hope we see more high quality investigative journalism like this on HN! /sarc I think the only good thing about these type of whitewash pieces on HN (of which I don't even bother to click on) are the comments here that do the work of the journalists… but NYT history is pretty suspect when it comes to things surrounding corporate and government reporting so that's not surprising.
wfo 11y ago
I agree with you about the quality of this article, but I find it odd that for many people here and in SV culture, the moment anything in any industry behaves in a way which you don't approve of or don't understand it's immediately "ripe for disruption". Maybe journalism is just genuinely hard and there are plenty of very smart people working hard at NYT but it isn't always perfect, and "disrupting" the industry -- a weasel word which means nothing except "I am a libertarian and I support new things so long as they completely exterminate a non-libertarian established power structure" -- isn't smart, possible, helpful, or in fact any of the three.
PhasmaFelis 11y ago
> * if even the NYT is this pathetic then that just underscores that journalism is still ripe for disruption.* As far as I can tell, "disruption" is about doing things faster, punchier, shinier, on tighter margins and with a shorter turn-around time. Do you think that's going to produce better journalism? There are worse things that the sometimes-slipshod NYT. I'm frightened of what comes next for journalism.
- natch 11y ago
  Having had a very up-close view of some stories NYT covered, I'd say they are doing horse-trading with the government in selected cases, where they pull certain punches in exchange for access. This is the kind of thing I would expect from them, but not from a player like firstlook.org / The Intercept, for example. Sure they are a special case because they have some deep pocket backers, but that's at least one example of better.