Whilst this submission was posted a little earlier than that one, this article is re-reporting of the Ars Technica article. We normally reward the user who submits the first article about a topic, however the guidelines ask us to submit the original source for a topic, so in this case we're rewarding the user to submitted the original source.
You are posting these dupe comments as often as not to shut down perfectly valid discussion threads, I don't see the point. You rarely actually contribute to the discussion, it is mostly just these silly links.
It's a "dupe" if the topic posted today is the same as the topic that was posted a week ago.
In this case, there is "significant new information" (or new/original analysis), so we can host a new discussion about it, as there are new things to comment on.
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46062504.
Whilst this submission was posted a little earlier than that one, this article is re-reporting of the Ars Technica article. We normally reward the user who submits the first article about a topic, however the guidelines ask us to submit the original source for a topic, so in this case we're rewarding the user to submitted the original source.
[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45994854
You are posting these dupe comments as often as not to shut down perfectly valid discussion threads, I don't see the point. You rarely actually contribute to the discussion, it is mostly just these silly links.
Yeah, it’s not a “dupe” if the discussion I might want join happened a week ago.
It's a "dupe" if the topic posted today is the same as the topic that was posted a week ago.
In this case, there is "significant new information" (or new/original analysis), so we can host a new discussion about it, as there are new things to comment on.
It's related, but a feature announcement and a look into why that feature exists are different topics.
That's not a dupe, that's related. That provides no EU/DMA context.