Wired adds no new insights, no facts, no sources, not even new speculative theories, it just rehashes old gossip. Fuck, this is one step down from Gawker.
I'm so glad I stopped taken Wired seriously since the 90's.
Even if this story is a rehash of what has been already said in F1 fan blogs, it is very accessible to people who know little about the sport.
Journalism is about so much more than pure facts.
This is the case most of the time whether it's a new design, or political. That's F1.
Don't worry, that's just the obligatory HN top comment of: I happen to have more knowledge of the topic, therefore this article sucks.
I also thought it was an interesting read.
I think they did their job.
You can't expect every time a news story is written that it will provide new information, especially when you are already quite aware of the content of the story before you even read it.
I, for one, have never heard of this story. I found the article interesting.
The Wired article, while to be commended for bringing the appeal of the technical challenges of Formula 1, demonstrates a shallow and incomplete understanding of the issues at play, unfortunately. It's unsurprising, but a little disappointing.
I've been watching pretty much every F1 race for the past 3+ years, but don't read any F1 blogs. This was news to me. I have been growing a little tired of the Vettel's domination, even if it's well earned.
That's why Silverstone was one of my favorite races this year. Because as soon as Vettel crashed, it was like, "oh, we have an actual race on our hands now!" and the commentators said something similar, something about it no longer just being a race for second place.