4 ms·

Correct me if Im wrong, but.. are you defending closed source and restriction of information?

by deely3 4y ago

Tostino 4y ago
That's not at all how I read that comment... more like "through a side channel, we found this out" rather than spelling out exactly where they found it.
withinboredom 4y ago
It’s the difference between going into a town square and yelling “look everyone, I found a treasure map!” And going on a treasure hunt. They found comments that were commented out for a reason. These commented out sections aren’t a good look for the author. Usually commented out sections are either funny, notes, or provide some extra context. He could have attempted to share this with someone in the industry of sharing information (like a reporter) who could validate it, and ask Microsoft for a comment — who will now be on the defensive instead of (potentially) forthcoming with more context about why those sections were commented out. This is a pretty fucked way of doing this.
- bastawhiz 4y ago
  > and ask Microsoft for a comment Doesn't this sort of invalidate your point? Microsoft is going to know they accidentally leaked their comments and start stripping them. It's not possible to perform journalism here without revealing where you got the information you're reporting. Seriously, how do you write this story without making it obvious that your big scoop is the comments from the paper?
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    The point is not to frame the comments as a mistake and give the author a fair chance.
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    The issue is that the twitter thread makes it out that leaving comments is “amateur” or “wrong” without giving the author a fair chance to rebut them. Anyone seeing this is going to start stripping their comments so they don’t get framed this way.
derefr 4y ago
They're defending "polite open secrets" — things that are only spread by word-of-mouth among friends, because as soon as a centralized broadcast source reports them, they become so over-exploited that they cease to usefully exist.

Correct me if Im wrong, but.. are you defending closed source and restriction of information?

by deely3 4y ago

Correct me if Im wrong, but.. are you defending closed source and restriction of information?

That's not at all how I read that comment... more like "through a side channel, we found this out" rather than spelling out exactly where they found it.

withinboredom 4y ago

It’s the difference between going into a town square and yelling “look everyone, I found a treasure map!” And going on a treasure hunt. They found comments that were commented out for a reason. These commented out sections aren’t a good look for the author. Usually commented out sections are either funny, notes, or provide some extra context. He could have attempted to share this with someone in the industry of sharing information (like a reporter) who could validate it, and ask Microsoft for a comment — who will now be on the defensive instead of (potentially) forthcoming with more context about why those sections were commented out. This is a pretty fucked way of doing this.

bastawhiz 4y ago
> and ask Microsoft for a comment Doesn't this sort of invalidate your point? Microsoft is going to know they accidentally leaked their comments and start stripping them. It's not possible to perform journalism here without revealing where you got the information you're reporting. Seriously, how do you write this story without making it obvious that your big scoop is the comments from the paper?
- withinboredom 4y ago
  The point is not to frame the comments as a mistake and give the author a fair chance.
- withinboredom 4y ago
  The issue is that the twitter thread makes it out that leaving comments is “amateur” or “wrong” without giving the author a fair chance to rebut them. Anyone seeing this is going to start stripping their comments so they don’t get framed this way.

derefr 4y ago

They're defending "polite open secrets" — things that are only spread by word-of-mouth among friends, because as soon as a centralized broadcast source reports them, they become so over-exploited that they cease to usefully exist.