61–70 of 194 posts
I will celebrate the day when HN front-page is not filled with Apple drama and gossip.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Guilty? As in, culpable? I am baffled by your willingness to burn someone at the stake for an honest mistake. Have you never misplaced anything valuable, left something behind by accident? Also, Gawker could have easily reported on this story and kept the engineer's name private. For example, read the NY Times article re-reporting the story, you won't see the engineer's name. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/technol…
No. I've never misplaced something that could cost my company thousands of dollars and I'd like to believe I wouldn't be foolish enough to even bring something like that into a bar with me.
I asked if you ever misplaced anything valuable or anything that mattered to you. A wallet could be something valuable, or your keys. Most valuable, however, would be your sense of compassion, which right now you have clearly misplaced.
I will celebrate the day when HN front-page is not filled with Apple drama and gossip.
The reason the frontpage has the stories it does is because they're the ones users have voted for. If you want different stories, the solution starts with you: try voting for some. You haven't voted on any of the stories currently on the frontpage.
What reason did gizmodo have to release the identity of the engineer that lost the phone? To "prove" that their story was more real? Did they even consider what's going to happen to that guy? Every gawker website feels like it is just barely a half step above a tabloid, and in some cases, less than that (cf, Valleywag). Behaving this petulantly is not a very good way to discourage the popular perception of bloggers,…
Apple knew whose phone it was, this story doesn't harm him there at all. It may even help prevent him from being fired or retaliated against, now that his name is public. It could help or hurt with future employers, but I'd guess on balance it helps. Probably won't be trusted with prototypes again, but that was going to be the case either way. Not to defend gizmodo, they seem pretty borderline in the whole thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards
Did you even read this before you quoted it?
Harm limitation principle ...This principle of limitation means that some weight needs to be given to the negative consequences of full disclosure, creating a practical and ethical dilemma. The Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics offers the following advice, which is representative of the practical ideals of most professional journalists. Quoting directly:[17]
* Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.
* Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
* Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
* Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
* Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
What reason did gizmodo have to release the identity of the engineer that lost the phone? To "prove" that their story was more real? Did they even consider what's going to happen to that guy? Every gawker website feels like it is just barely a half step above a tabloid, and in some cases, less than that (cf, Valleywag). Behaving this petulantly is not a very good way to discourage the popular perception of bloggers,…
They very possibly did the guy a favor exposing his identity not only to insulate him from hasher retribution but also as pretty clear evidence it was an innocent mistake. No one would leave their identity on the device if they had personally conspired to sell it on the black market. I don't think it's that big of a deal. If the device was being field tested Apple was accepting the risk of theft/loss. If it had been…
Apple puts in a lot of effort to maintain an air of secrecy. It's part of their pubic image. AFAIK this is the first time there has been a leak this big. It is a big deal to Apple.
Inside the RDF, you are probably correct.
Back here in reality, I would just like to take the opportunity to shout out, _BIG FUCKING DEAL_. They're working on a new version of the arguably most successful consumer electronic in history. WHO KNEW? It uses all the latest technology. WOW! It looks... SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT! Stop the presses and notify the President!!
I am tired of Apple acting treating it's product pipeline like it's the fucking Iranian nuclear program, of the blogs and MSM gobbling it up by the fistful, of these fools who buy into this idiocy and waste minutes, hours, days sitting in line for the newest iProduct. Really? You're going to post a 5 minute video of you unboxing an iPad? Certainly there are more pressing issues confronting mankind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Apple would fire him over this, they probably would (or did?) fire him a week or so ago when it first went missing and got remote-wiped. The fact that it was later found and he was publicly humiliated shouldn't change anything in this case - they already knew it was lost and they knew this situation was a real possibility. If they hadn't fired him yet, I don't see how it makes sense to fire him now that someone fo…
If they fire him now, it's CYA. "A prototype has gone missing" might get Steve Jobs or Jon Ive or whoever fretting, but "the fourth generation iPhone is sitting in Gizmodo's office" has to be resulting in legendary anger from the top floor, and I can totally see the manager saying "we canned the guy and we tightened our testing restrictions" to placate upper-level anger.
Seeing the name-drop of the Apple engineer on Gizmodo made my jaw drop. I couldn't believe that they would do such a thing. This no doubt casts a shadow on his career and life. It's a reckless attempt by what appears to be a subpar site to make itself somewhat legitimate. In this respect, they've failed miserably.
I think you're overestimating the impact this has. People generally don't remember a name in an article they read at some website some time ago. Secondly, the number of people actually reading this is quite small. For instance, suppose someone lost a Nokia prototype in the same way and the engineer later applied to Apple. How large is the chance that the responsible guy at Apple HR would have heard the story and remembered the name?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's fair. What Gizmodo did would violate the ethics policy of any serious news gathering organization. I don't consider them press.
Cable/TV News fairly regularly pay subjects for stories.
Edit: This http://gizmodo.com/5520438/how-apple-lost-the-next-iphone is the article I'm referring to. Purchasing the iphone was definitely illegal but it isn't completely out of bounds for journalism.