5 ms·

Example of the previous editorial style: https://web.archive.org/web/20190410065314/https://www.theregister.co.uk/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190410065314/ht

• taffronaut 4y ago
  That's a real contrast. The current site is a shadow of its former self. The new stuff doesn't even seem to be paid-for placement - just lame outsourced copy.
  • robertlagrant 4y ago
    Everything, good or bad, regresses to the mean.
  • quickthrower2 4y ago
    Bean counters have taken over. Ad in front of geek = $1 / 1000 impression. Ad in front of CTO = $10 / 1000 impressions. Then milk the cow, get the investment back and move on. Anyway https://www.theonion.com/ https://www.theonion.com/ https://www.betootaadvocate.com/ https://www.betootaadvocate.com/ Hopefully http://n-gate.com/ http://n-gate.com/ gets going again. (Type out the url, he detects HN redirects).
    • hansel_der 4y ago
      > Type out the url, he detects HN redirects referer actually
      • quickthrower2 4y ago
        Thanks… referer is what I really meant
• BurnerBouy 4y ago
  An actual example of the previous editorial style: https://web.archive.org/web/20050428082501/http://www.theregister.co.uk/ https://web.archive.org/web/20050428082501/http://www.thereg...
• antisthenes 4y ago
  Bland tabloid then, and bland tabloid now. What changed? I really don't see much of a difference
  • xtracto 4y ago
    I don't know... for me, who read it in the mid 2000s it was kind of like reading the "Big Issue" or the "Metro" in the UK: Sometimes I wanted to read low thinking tabloid funny news. The Register was great for that. Nowadays it is Yet Another Technology Website.
  • quickthrower2 4y ago
    From the link: "Rust never sleeps: C++-alike language tops Stack Overflow survey for fourth year in a row" The tongue was a bit more in cheek before I guess