Metafilter, in Wired May 4, 2008 7:52 AM   Subscribe

Metafilter's own finite, quoted in Wired magazine.

The April 2008 issue of Wired reprints finite's post about the iPhone (p. 20). Also on Wired's website, here.
posted by The corpse in the library to MetaFilter-Related at 7:52 AM (61 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite

I think it's kind of weird how a magazine as headstrong and self-aware of it's tech context as Wired can manage to not include links to the web-based content its quoting when it publishes excerpts of that content on the web. I know that it's heading for print, sure, but c'mon. Come up with a system. I know this internet stuff is pretty new and weird, but you didn't name the magazine "Papery".
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:57 AM on May 4, 2008 [20 favorites]


(Semi-related: Mefi was one of five of the blogs on Time's 25 traffic-whoring list thing that got tiny mention in a sidebar in the print edition, so woo? But in even the tiny 60 words or so to which they reduced the on-line writeup, they managed some bizarre hypercorrection of plural "they" to "he or she". So, uh, boo?

I don't have the issue handy—my mother-in-law snagged it for me, so maybe I'll see if she can send me the text verbatim.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:01 AM on May 4, 2008


Also, and this is partly just further underscoring the weirdness of print vs. web procedures, but the bottom of the Rants page has this disclaimer:

RANTS Letters should include writer's name, address, and daytime phone number and be sent to rants@wired.com. Submissions may be edited and may be published or used in any medium. They become the property of Wired and will not be returned.

So, did finite send them an email or a letter containing his comment? Or did they just (this is my guess) trip across it and decide it was quotable? And if so in that latter case, are they merrily asserting property rights over it? Or is their disclaimer just woefully mis-fit to their current procedures? Or what?
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:04 AM on May 4, 2008 [2 favorites]


I never quite understood the complaint about the "iTunes" lock-in. It's only a "lock-in" if you buy protected music through the iTunes Music Store, and certainly it's easy enough to buy rip CDs, or download unprotected MP3s and AACs from the iTunes store, Bleep, Amazon, etc.

Moreover, most of the complaints in there are addressed in one form or another. You'll be able to get both free and commercial software developed by third parties in a month or two, and so what if apps are digitally signed? If you want access to the filesystem, there are ways to get there, too.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:09 AM on May 4, 2008


Yeah, kinda weird that their "letters to the editor" section includes a random quote from another website. But cool mention otherwise.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:10 AM on May 4, 2008


And if so in that latter case, are they merrily asserting property rights over it?

Kind of ironic, though, given the substance of the comment. Doesn't information want to be free?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:10 AM on May 4, 2008


They become the property of Wired

What does that even mean? They think they own the actual content of finite's post?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:10 AM on May 4, 2008


Hey finite: send 'em a C&D....
posted by anotherpanacea at 8:25 AM on May 4, 2008


I think it's kind of weird how a magazine as headstrong and self-aware of it's tech context as Wired can manage to not include links to the web-based content its quoting when it publishes excerpts of that content on the web.

Has CueCat been forgotten so soon?
posted by Artw at 8:30 AM on May 4, 2008 [2 favorites]


Wake me when matthaughey is coverboy of Mad.


Oh.
posted by Dizzy at 8:32 AM on May 4, 2008


Actually, thinking about it, it's extremely unlikely that they didn't contact finite before they went to press. They've got a legal department for a reason....

However, if by some chance they didn't contact you, finite, be sure to treat them like they treated Walter Jon Williams.
posted by anotherpanacea at 8:38 AM on May 4, 2008 [4 favorites]


WIRED also came into my house, found a sandwich in the fridge, and claimed and ate that.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:03 AM on May 4, 2008


Doesn't information want to be free?

no, information does not want to be free. information, in fact, wants to imprison you.
posted by quonsar at 10:55 AM on May 4, 2008 [5 favorites]


they managed some bizarre hypercorrection of plural "they" to "he or she".

Is that some bizarre hypercorrection of singular "they" to plural "they"?
posted by languagehat at 11:17 AM on May 4, 2008


In terms of hug needs, does everyone include the staff of random magazines?
posted by Pants! at 11:29 AM on May 4, 2008


In terms of hug needs, does everyone include the staff of random magazines?

What part of everyone is confusing you?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:03 PM on May 4, 2008 [3 favorites]


I did not submit anything to Wired, and they did not contact me. A MeFi mail this morning from The corpse in the library was the first I heard of this (thanks!).

I think a quote of that length probably falls clearly within fair use, but their assertion of ownership of "submissions" right below non-submitted quotes is not cool. Nor is their lack of a link to where they're quoting from.

And, really, my biggest gripe with the iPhone isn't even one of the four things they quoted me on, it is what they edited out of my comment: there can be no user-modifiable apps! (And the 3rd party apps that will eventually be available will be severely limited in what they're allowed to do.)
posted by finite at 12:12 PM on May 4, 2008 [1 favorite]


> they managed some bizarre hypercorrection of plural "they" to "he or she".

Is that some bizarre hypercorrection of singular "they" to plural "they"?

No, okay, so since I can't tell if you're joking or not nor whether or not you misunderstood me or I misunderstood you, so, here it goes:

1. Time magazine, a weird sort of hybrid noun that is both singular (Time magazine is a magazine; you can purchase a copy of it from a newstand) and a collective (Time magazine is a bunch of people who write and edit content which gets published).

2. So the they who managed the bizarre hypercorrection is either singular or plural, depending on how you feel like parsing it. Doesn't matter.

3. The hypercorrection in question was in a sentence along these lines: "On Metafilter, users can post about anything he or she wants." Clearly, "users" and "he or she" don't agree. But, admittedly, it looks like it might not be the hypercorrection I had in mind, of "they" to "he or she", but rather an error in maintaining agreement after pluralizing "users" in the rewrite, since the original online writeup contained this:

While the typical blog is written by one person wearing sweatpants reclaimed from the hamper, Metafilter lets any user — regardless of what they're wearing — contribute links and brief commentary highlighting interesting stuff he or she finds on the web.

So, retracted. They did not commit a bizarre hypercorrection of plural they to singular he or she; they failed to adjust the original-text "he or she" to match with the new user->users change when they blurbified it for the print edition. I apologize, Time; I was wrong about the manner in which you totally failed at copy editing!
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:28 PM on May 4, 2008


Doesn't information want to be free?
no, information does not want to be free. information, in fact, wants to imprison you.


A way-too-common point of confusion. Information does want to be free. It just doesn't want you to be free. Fortunately, by accessing a large variety of conflicting information, you can get it fighting amongst itself and mostly leaving you alone.
posted by wendell at 12:31 PM on May 4, 2008 [4 favorites]


Curious that there's just the one non-Wired comment there, too. Metafilter's own L. Fitzgerald Sjöberg / lore is a Wired person, right? What do you know about the Rants desk, lore?
posted by mumkin at 12:38 PM on May 4, 2008


no, information does not want to be free. information, in fact, wants to imprison you.

No, Apple wants to imprizon you! Free yoor mind!
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:28 PM on May 4, 2008


Information wants you to give me that sandwich.
posted by Artw at 1:29 PM on May 4, 2008 [2 favorites]


cortex, buddy, end process.
posted by fleacircus at 1:33 PM on May 4, 2008


"On the one hand information wants to be expensive, because it's so valuable. The right information in the right place just changes your life. On the other hand, information wants to be free, because the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all the time. So you have these two fighting against each other."
--Stewart Brand at the first Hackers' Conference in 1984 (via wikipedia)
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:39 PM on May 4, 2008 [3 favorites]


INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREEly available to those who are willing to pay big money for it.
posted by Fuzzy Skinner at 1:53 PM on May 4, 2008


Doesn't information want to be free?

no, information does not want to be free. information, in fact, wants to imprison you.


A way-too-common point of confusion. Information does want to be free. It just doesn't want you to be free. Fortunately, by accessing a large variety of conflicting information, you can get it fighting amongst itself and mostly leaving you alone.


No, no!

Information want to reproduce.

So it's doing its best to turn your brain into a giant genital.

And it's getting awfully good at it.
posted by jamjam at 2:32 PM on May 4, 2008 [4 favorites]


No, Apple wants to imprizon you! Free yoor mind!

Think differenter!
posted by Sys Rq at 2:36 PM on May 4, 2008


Information doesn't want a goddamn thing.

Except IKEA's Hükkebrø sofa recliner, that looks really comfy.
posted by Kattullus at 2:37 PM on May 4, 2008


Information wants you to want it.
posted by treepour at 2:44 PM on May 4, 2008


Wired's still around?
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:47 PM on May 4, 2008


Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
posted by Mikey-San at 2:47 PM on May 4, 2008 [2 favorites]


Letters should include writer's name, address, and daytime phone number and be sent to rants@wired.com. Submissions may be edited and may be published or used in any medium. They become the property of Wired and will not be returned.

From wired.

I'm thinking this does not include appropriation of thoughts by other sites without permission of the commenter via MeFi.

http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-04/rants

Case in point.
posted by Sparx at 2:55 PM on May 4, 2008


Way too late to notice that. I'm gonna put some music on, annoy my flatmates and rock out.
posted by Sparx at 3:06 PM on May 4, 2008



So it's doing its best to turn your brain into a giant genital.

And it's getting awfully good at it.


Well, fuck.
posted by Sparx at 3:10 PM on May 4, 2008


In Soviet Russia, freedom wants to be informed.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 3:36 PM on May 4, 2008


No, no!

Information want to reproduce.

So it's doing its best to turn your brain into a giant genital.


Hey, this guy gets it. Furthermore, DNA is naught but a medium for storing and copying information.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 3:37 PM on May 4, 2008

Well, fuck
Exactly.
posted by Godbert at 3:39 PM on May 4, 2008


Sorry, don't have any inside track on this. I'd say "Submissions [...] become the property of Wired and will not be returned" clearly doesn't refer to things that aren't submissions, but that's just me speaking as me, not as someone who writes for Wired.com.
posted by lore at 4:16 PM on May 4, 2008


lore's previous comment (c)(r)(tm) ME, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

BOOM! MOTHERFUCKER
posted by spiderwire at 4:33 PM on May 4, 2008 [1 favorite]


I can't tell if you're joking or not nor whether or not you misunderstood me or I misunderstood you

In actual fact, I was just emitting a bit of lazy snark, not having even bothered to check the original context you were citing, thus leading you to a tortured reanalysis and sorta mea culpa. Forget it, Jake, it's MetaTalk!
posted by languagehat at 5:05 PM on May 4, 2008


And that's metawang!
posted by fleacircus at 5:14 PM on May 4, 2008


Forget it, Jake, it's MetaTalk!

He's probably taunting your hatless head and ignorance of latin. Don't trust him.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:44 PM on May 4, 2008


meta culpa?

(mental postscript: do not taunt languagehat)
posted by cosmonik at 5:54 PM on May 4, 2008


Too bad I only read Weird
posted by Pollomacho at 6:34 PM on May 4, 2008


Q: WHAT DID THE SUSHI CHEF SAY TO THE CUSTOMER WHEN HE FOUND OUT HE WAS ALL OUT OF NORI?

A: MEA KELPA.
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:45 PM on May 4, 2008 [1 favorite]


Thanks for that Walter Jon Williams stuff, anotherpanacea. It sounds more like bureaucratic inertia than overweening gall to me, but the situation still sucked for Williams. And I wondered what happened to that Hardwired imprint. They reprinted Bruce Sterling's novel The Artificial Kid and stuff by Charles Platt and Rudy Rucker, then they sort of disappeared totally. Looks like they fell apart when the publisher walked away. I'm going to look up that guy Peter Rutten.
posted by cgc373 at 7:48 PM on May 4, 2008


Information does not want. Information is what our brains turn random noise into.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:58 AM on May 5, 2008


It sounds more like bureaucratic inertia than overweening gall to me

Funny, looks like a classic case of overweening gall to me. Colossally stupid overweening gall, actually.
posted by mediareport at 5:39 AM on May 5, 2008


I'm pretty sure "property of wired" simply means they would own the physical letter you mail them, not the I.P. (i.e. you can't ask for it back)

I wouldn't worry about that bit of legalese too much.

Also, the iPhone's lack of openness sucks. The reason signed apps are a problem is because the signed apps have to follow a lot of rules that are more about Apple's bottom line then protecting users from viruses, etc. The system is more like the one in place for video game systems like the PS3 and Xbox.

A festival of lameness.
posted by delmoi at 6:33 AM on May 5, 2008


Wired, Tired, amirite, blah.
posted by Sys Rq at 7:44 AM on May 5, 2008


Funny, looks like a classic case of overweening gall to me. Colossally stupid overweening gall, actually.

It should be noted that Wired is under new ownership and management, for what it's worth, and that the new guys have long since settled amicably with WJW. Sadly, the new business model seems to involve printing a glossy advertisement with articles about how Steve Carrell is smart and Sarah Silverman is funny, which is something of a disappointment compared with the early years of tech journalism, so I'm not sure if that's an overall win.

I still have the premiere issue in a baggy somewhere. *Sigh*
posted by anotherpanacea at 8:49 AM on May 5, 2008


I miss Mondo 2000. And being a jobless hippy.
posted by Artw at 9:13 AM on May 5, 2008


You and me both, Artw.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:19 AM on May 5, 2008


My mom used to always tell me "that Weird magazine" was in the mail when I got it every month.

Btw, is a complete run of the first several years of Wired from the second issue on worth anything?
posted by empath at 4:46 PM on May 5, 2008


Completely unrelated to the topic, but I just now realized that delmoi's name is probably pronounced del muah and not delmoy
posted by empath at 4:47 PM on May 5, 2008


empath, you fucking just blew my tiny mind
posted by Kattullus at 4:57 PM on May 5, 2008


I had that same realization when I was working on 88 Lines, but I'm pretty sure delmoi has since corrected me and that it is, in fact, del moy.
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:09 PM on May 5, 2008


Thank god, because I really didn't want to have to retool my mental pronunciation after all this time.
posted by languagehat at 5:32 PM on May 5, 2008


In Klingon my name is pronounced "Qwi'k'ee'ma(ah)rt".
posted by Dizzy at 5:37 PM on May 5, 2008


delmoi pronounces his username "Del moy".
posted by cgc373 at 4:43 AM on May 6, 2008


Shit, I've been pronouncing it "Del muah" all this time.

For reference, I pronounce my own as "A dee-odd Kwocker".

Just kidding.
posted by A dead Quaker at 2:12 AM on May 7, 2008


« Older By Executive Order   |   Do mods and users see MetaFilter differently? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments