2013-05-02 BBC News: Bitcoins illegally mined on network

[P_Shep]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22380603

Not sure what their point is :/

[1715584126]

1715584126

[1715584126]

1715584126

[1715584126]

1715584126

[1715584126]

1715584126

[1715584126]

1715584126

[Gabi]

I suppose the point is "don't trust ESEA"

[DataPlumber]

I guess they couldn't find a less awkward way to squish "Bitcoin" and "illegal" together.

Edit: and here's what I get for posting before RTFA.

Please correct the thread subject to the actual article title, "Games network used to 'mine' Bitcoins illegally"

Which still squishes "Bitcoin" and "illegal" together, but at least the association is much weaker.

[dree12]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22380603

Not sure what their point is :/

This is good journalism. Objective reporting on only the facts. Your thread title warps it to double-speak. I'm not sure what your point is.

[P_Shep]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22380603

Not sure what their point is :/

This is good journalism. Objective reporting on only the facts. Your thread title warps it to double-speak. I'm not sure what your point is.

My title is the copy and paste from the link to the story from the main page. I didn't notice that the story title way different.

See:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology/
(but it won't be there for long)

[odolvlobo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22380603

Not sure what their point is :/

This is good journalism. Objective reporting on only the facts. Your thread title warps it to double-speak. I'm not sure what your point is.

"More than $3,700 (£2,400) of the virtual currency Bitcoins has been illegally "mined" by a rogue employee at US games company ESEA."


I wouldn't call that line "objective reporting". "illegally" is presumptuous. Nobody was arrested or charged with a crime. I don't see any mention of any complaints. There is no information to support the characterization. I think they threw in the word "illegally" because nobody would read the article if they didn't. That isn't good journalism, that sensationalism.

[Dusty]

I wouldn't call that line "objective reporting". "illegally" is presumptuous. Nobody was arrested or charged with a crime. I don't see any mention of any complaints. There is no information to support the characterization. I think they threw in the word "illegally" because nobody would read the article if they didn't. That isn't good journalism, that sensationalism.

Last time I checked, using people's resources without their consent was illegal, I don't know if it's the same for you where you live.