this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
528 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59179 readers
2145 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
528
The New York Times source code leaked by a 4chan user (stackdiary.com)
submitted 5 months ago by skilledtothegills@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
83 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A user on the online forum 4chan has leaked a massive 270GB of data purportedly belonging to The New York Times. This leak includes what is claimed to be the source code for the newspaper’s digital operations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] skymtf@pricefield.org 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I have not read the news in a really long time just cause paywalls are annoying as frick.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Consider paying for the news...?

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'd only do that if you want independent news.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I'm not sure what you're saying here ...

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Pay for news if you want it to be independent, and not beholden to sponsors.

I'd go as far as to say that paying for news (if you have the means to do so comfortably), is your duty as a commitment to democracy.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ahh, yes I agree on all points; thanks for the clarification!

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It's amazing the number of times on Lemmy that someone will come in with the completely opposite "explanation" for what I was saying. Almost like they have an agenda.

It's so weird to turn my statement of "support the news with money" into "the mainstream media can't be trusted".

Maybe it's only happened twice, but it's still weird that it's happened twice.

[–] PumaStoleMyBluff@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Phrasing things in semi-sarcastic converse will do that

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I was wondering if that's where you were going in part.

I think it's a bit of the phrasing; you stated an opinion that's vague to the point of tiptoeing towards the potentially loaded question: "who's independent media?"

It's not uncommon in the conservative media sphere to see a similar (typically series) of leading ambiguous questions. They're never genuine, it's always in the style of:

You know what the best operating system is? I'll tell you what the best operating system is, it's Linux. Do you know why Linux is the best operating system? It's because it's got penguins and penguins are great! Do you know why penguins are great? I mean, can you think of a more iconic bird? That's why, that is why ... and Big Microsoft is out to destroy your hopes and dreams aren't they? Yes, yes they absolutely are, with their soulless Windows operating system that's manufactured by the flying spaghetti monster. Now obviously folks, only use Linux if you support freedom not the unholy flying spaghetti monster. The flying spaghetti monster will destroy America. It's its one true mission. Support freedom, support penguins, stop the flying spaghetti monster.

I think it's made a bunch of if antsy lol

[–] PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

He probably means one of these (or both):

  1. New York Times is a huge corporation. The commenter would only support a site which is run by one creator, or with a genuine small team, which is transparent and not an asshole.

  2. New York Times is biased politically or accepting bribery attempts from other corpos to make them look in a better light.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Jesus Christ, no. It's almost like you're trying to sow distrust in the news and facts.

The NYT isn't perfect, but it's some of the most reliable news the world has.

As of March 2023, The New York Times Company employs 5,800 individuals,[101] including 1,700 journalists according to deputy managing editor Sam Dolnick.[122] Journalists for The New York Times may not run for public office, provide financial support to political candidates or causes, endorse candidates, or demonstrate public support for causes or movements.[123] Journalists are subject to the guidelines established in "Ethical Journalism" and "Guidelines on Integrity".[124] According to the former, Times journalists must abstain from using sources with a personal relationship to them and must not accept reimbursements or inducements from individuals who may be written about in The New York Times, with exceptions for gifts of nominal value.[125] The latter requires attribution and exact quotations, though exceptions are made for linguistic anomalies. Staff writers are expected to ensure the veracity of all written claims, but may delegate researching obscure facts to the research desk.[126] In March 2021, the Times established a committee to avoid journalistic conflicts of interest with work written for The New York Times, following columnist David Brooks's resignation from the Aspen Institute for his undisclosed work on the initiative Weave.[127]

[–] PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well it definitely seemed like that. Sorry I was just assuming, since most Lemmy people are really anti-establishment on everything basically.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, if you didn't get it from me, you certainly would have gotten it from some of these responses.

[–] PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 months ago

Well yeah. This comment section is wild, that's for sure.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The New York Crimes is a garbage propaganda rag. They don't deserve a red cent from anyone after pushing their transphobic agenda, (and responding to widespread criticism by publishing an article defending JK Rowling) or after they blatantly lied and published a fake news story about Hamas conducting mass rape in an attempt to sway public opinion to be in favor of Israel's genocide. If you have a NYT subscription, you are paying people to lie to you.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Dear god I can't believe anyone still believes this shit after NYT hired an ex IDF soldier without any prior journalistic experience to write a massive fake rape propaganda article for israel.

NYT is a state propaganda outlet.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago
  1. New York Times is a huge corporation. The commenter would only support a site which is run by one creator, or with a genuine small team, which is transparent and not an asshole.

Yeah but good luck chasing multiple stories across the world as a small team.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago

Why would anyone sponsor an IDF propaganda outlet?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago

You can go to archive.is and put in the url of a news story you want to read in the second box and it will usually let you bypass the paywall.