#editorial | Logs for 2017-05-14

« return
[02:17:30] * Bytram is exhausted
[02:17:45] <Bytram> too short a night followed by too long a day. :/
[02:18:19] <Bytram> Was able to push out a couple stories... and that's all I've got.
[02:18:28] <Bytram> away
[04:47:56] -!- nick [nick!~nick@Soylent/Staff/Editor/n1] has joined #editorial
[04:47:56] -!- mode/#editorial [+v nick] by Hephaestus
[14:18:16] <Bytram> ~eds an updated version of the WannaCry ransomware has been see in the wild. I just submitted a "breaking News" storyabout it... can someone please review and push it out? It's time sensitive as many PCs which were powered down over the weekend may be in for a nasty surprise come Monday morning.
[14:18:17] <exec> editor ping for Bytram (reason: an updated version of the wannacry ransomware has been see in the wild. i just submitted a "breaking news" storyabout it... can someone please review and push it out? it's time sensitive as many pcs which were powered down over the weekend may be in for a nasty surprise come monday morning.): janrinok zz_janrinok n1 nick martyb Bytram cmn32480 coolhand takyon bytram|away Fnord666 charon GreatOutdoors FatPhil Snow goodie m
[14:22:25] <Bytram> I need to be at work in less than an hour, so am afk for a bit as I get ready.
[16:01:37] -!- nick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[16:02:03] -!- nick [nick!~nick@Soylent/Staff/Editor/n1] has joined #editorial
[16:02:03] -!- mode/#editorial [+v nick] by Hephaestus
[18:35:26] * nick decides he doesn't know where to begin with a comment on the tesla roof
[20:38:56] * nick kicks Fnord666
[20:39:02] -!- upstart has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
[20:43:38] -!- chromas has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
[21:19:11] -!- chromas [chromas!~chromas@0::1] has joined #editorial
[21:34:45] <nick> any other eds awake
[23:35:13] <TheMightyBuzzard> dude, nick, you let a wikipedia page be called a news article. i am baffled.
[23:35:52] <nick> technically its a business and techonomics article
[23:36:20] <nick> i just found it very interesting
[23:38:17] <nick> most of the brokers i know do not accept US clients, wasn't sure why, but that submission gave me the answer
[23:38:32] <nick> i was considering putting it as an 'answers' but there wasn't a question
[23:39:27] <TheMightyBuzzard> well interesting yeah but reference and op-ed
[23:40:20] <TheMightyBuzzard> which'd be all good if we had an oped nexus. guess i should make us one.
[23:40:50] <TheMightyBuzzard> or even an oped topic i spose
[23:41:23] <TheMightyBuzzard> yeah, think i'll do that this next site update
[23:42:26] <nick> it was like 2am when i did that submission last night, i probably could have included more stuff, but the excerpt about the SEC's opinion on barriers to entry by capital requirements as an measure of sophistication of investors set by a regulator rather than the broker i felt was worthy of discussion
[23:43:54] <TheMightyBuzzard> ya, it just ain't generally one of our genres of articles we run. i got no objection to it being going forward but to date it ain't been.
[23:44:18] <nick> sure
[23:44:44] <nick> my opinion is, it's not ideal, but it's also not something that's really written about, and most people are probably not aware of anyway
[23:45:23] <TheMightyBuzzard> true nuff
[23:45:48] <nick> and it's not like we have problems running unedited press releases with 0 evidence of claims from Tesla and a few other places via third parties or directly, because they give us the good feels, then we can do this too
[23:46:53] <TheMightyBuzzard> ya, i'll hit us a nexus up for oped and possibly a generic original content nexus next update.
[23:47:27] <TheMightyBuzzard> that way we can run stuff like that and folks will at least be expecting it.
[23:47:33] <nick> i appreciate you pointing it out though, it's definitely not a normal submission... hopefully it generates some discussion, and in hindsight the opinion leaning in the summary isn't ideal and if i wasn't half asleep last night when doing it, i'd have probably put more into it and less emotive
[23:48:04] <TheMightyBuzzard> no worries. it'll do for some weekend discussion.
[23:48:54] <nick> if you have a minute, i wouldn't mind a second opinion on my additions to the psyops-brexit story
[23:51:16] <TheMightyBuzzard> sure. only thing i have scheduled for the next couple hours is some cigarette smoking and general bullshitting with the roomie.
[23:56:24] <TheMightyBuzzard> interestin. no complaints except the nested square brackets around and within your ed note offend my ocd for some reason.
[23:56:56] <TheMightyBuzzard> might be a code monkey thing
[23:57:05] <nick> i don't have ocd, but i completely understand... something a little off for me too
[23:57:16] <nick> dont know if you saw what i just added or not
[23:57:22] <nick> in the blockquote i just threw in
[23:57:25] <TheMightyBuzzard> i don't either. just a few tendencies when i'm not on my meds.
[23:57:31] <nick> I asked David Banks, Veterans for Britain’s head of communications, why they spent the money with AggregateIQ. “I didn’t find AggegrateIQ. They found us. They rang us up and pitched us. There’s no conspiracy here. [...] Their targeting was based on a set of technologies that hadn’t reached the UK yet. A lot of it was proprietary, they’d found a way of targeting people based on behavioural insights."
[23:58:38] <TheMightyBuzzard> yeah, that's an important bit. if there was no collusion between campaigns there's only questionable ethics rather than broken laws.