|
|
|
|
|
|
by jsnell
848 days ago
|
|
|
A submission getting comments isn't automatically a sign that it should be on the frontpage. Anything controversial or outrageous is likely to get a lot of comments any time it makes the frontpage. The really insidious part is that unlike the really interesting submissions which are one offs, these topics are being fed by a news cycle and a content treadmill, with a steady stream of new articles mostly rehashing the same information. So they tend to crowd To use this article as an example, you say you want to see a higher level discussion about the legal and technical aspects. A proper legal review of Apple's DMA position vs. the actual regulation text would definitely be fascinating to read and new information we haven't already seen multiple times. I'd totally upvote that. Maybe there's even a chance that such an article would lead to the higher level discussion you ask for. But it doesn't feel like that's at all what the article is? There's no analysis, just an assertion that this breaks the spirit and the letter of the law. (I don't know anything about the various grivances you listed. I was just replying to agust since they were under the false impression that dupes were only for exact submissions of the same article.) |
|
|
it was not my article btw, and it was the same practically as others
this higher level thing was a flop too, the discussion went on under other comments :)
my take is I have to right my first blog post somewhere if I have some time to analyze the issue
and then come back here and post it
the problem is I do not have time for this and Gemini hallucinates like hell so I cannot really work with a 66 page legal pdf efficiently :)
and I am not a gecko or chromium engineer or a lawyer so I actually lack the specific knowledge