I'm wondering because it seems more and more their stories are around politics instead of the tech and science of tech. It's sad to see more previously good reads go down this path and lose readership. Plenty of media out there covering the stuff - stick to what you do best. I am sure to get more downvotes.
A better question might be why tech has become so political. Tech has never been neutral, to be sure. The industrial revolution brought about deep, fundamental, and undemocratic changes, imposed by the wealthy. Something similar is happening today, and the price is being paid primarily by the people who least benefit from them. It's only natural this results in a politically charged atmosphere. It doesn't help that the only recent development of note, ML/LLMs, is as highly polarizing as the mechanized looms back then, and probably far less beneficial.
Most publications accept money from companies that wish to sway public opinions. Just as purely political sites sway back and forth so do all the tech publications. Same reason many movies have gone down the drain yet the same crap is being churned out even when movie producers are losing money for allowing external manipulation that offers no artistic value.
I think it would be a fun experiment to have a uBlock Origin section for sites that accept money for paid slants. One click could silence much if not most of the internet.
We've reached a saturation of totally cromulent phones and phone services, TVs, consumer computing hardware and even cars that make it difficult to look at any reviews as furthering any sort of story of technical development as opposed to some sort of lifestyle trend versus a technological sea change. The only substantive news is in the political realm.
Honestly, the most important new practical technological development of the past 5 years has been my damn pellet grill.
The computer-controlled pellet loading mechanism provides great smokey, BBQ flavor without the need to continually monitor temperature in person. This allows for long cooks - say, 14 hours with a brisket - without the need to continually check in or be present at the grill. It also provides wifi notifications when the grill is up to temp and when the meat is up to temp. Delicious results with substantially less work than conventional grills.
Thank you, your report is eye-opening, for I have never cooked anything requiring more than 3 hours (other than yogurt - boiled milk, cooled, yogurt added and then left in the oven overnight).
How about safety? grilling/smoking usually requires someone be nearby in case something goes wrong.
For a hot tasty brisket that was cooked 14 hours I go to a BBQ joint. Perhaps the BBQ joint uses a pellet grill (or will soon)!
They're generally considered to be safe unattended for 3-6 hours for a low-heat (ie, 200-250F) cook if they're clean, well-maintained and away from other flammable things, in the same way that a Crock Pot or low-temp oven cook might also be left alone for extended periods. For a high-heat "grill" (375-550F), I would absolutely remain present to prevent burning or a grease fire. They can be used both ways.
A high quality BBQ joint may have trained staff feeding their BBQs post-oak and checking in throughout the day for top-notch BBQ - and you'll pay for that attention. But can you get an A-/B+ brisket out of a pellet smoker in your back yard? Absolutely.
Over the past two years YOShInOn and I have gotten more complaints about posting ArsTechnica and TechCrunch articles to various places more than anything else, mainly for reasons that don't have anything to do with politics but when they do have to do with politics it is frequently the opposite of the kind of politics you have in mind (e.g. whatever your politics are)
Maybe there is "tech" and "tech business" news and sometimes the two do not really overlap that well (some times they overlap a lot). The overlap sort of depends on your point of view. How the tech works and how it is deployed are separate things.
I've noticed the same thing about Ars -- haven't really been reading TC for years. It seems like it's about pushing a political agenda now, not unbiased tech reporting :(
but it's also got Eric Berger who is in danger of becoming a Musk groupie because of his admiration for Musk's spaceflight accomplishments (he interviewed Musk extensively for a book for one thing) but also writes things like
Yes, you see them do it because it engages people like you, giving them more ad impressions. The engaged people then try to spread it, giving them even more ad impressions. They're being taken advantage of and they fail to realize it.
We think of the heyday of yellow journalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism "...that use eye-catching headlines and sensationalized exaggerations for increased sales.") as something from the bygone era of Hearst but, nope, it's alive and well and kicking into overdrive today.
