and while I'm being cranky...

[waider]

Why does Wired persist in posting filler crap instead of, say, actual articles?

Comments

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Um... it's Wired? Didn't you ever read the magazine?

[waider.livejournal.com]

D'you know, I don't think I ever have? Oh, wait, I did read the excerpt from Microserfs that they printed, back in the day. But Wired News does frequently have well-written articles that smack of, say, usefulness and possibly even research. As opposed to the linked-to article.

[nothings.livejournal.com]

It seems right along the lines of this post (http://www.livejournal.com/users/waider/184272.html).

Of course, one is Wired magazine, and one is Waider's LiveJournal.

[waider.livejournal.com]

Gosh, I'm flattered (I think) that you think my regular journal entries are so worthy of magazine publishing that that one counts as mere filler.

[nothings.livejournal.com]

My actual point, which I didn't bother clarifying, was that I have no clue what you are talking about in that post. For me to find out what you are talking about in that post, I would have to read or hear about it somewhere. While I could certainly read about it in somebody's blog, I'm not sure why it would be inappropriate for more traditional news-publishing agencies to comment on it. (Not that your post necessarily referred to iTunes... but my point is I have no clue what your post referred to, and here is an article in Wired that points out that, at least, iTunes is one of the culprits.)