They are a news source, not a published journal. The NYT does not publish sources or citations either.
Also, I absolutely would NOT want to be cited when I chat with journalists from a competitive standpoint (I've given a signal to my portfolio's competitors who I'm targeting), conflict of interest standpoint (the owner of the publication I'm talking to might have a financial interest in a competitor or my products), and a journalistic standpoint (anonymity of sources allows us to speak honestly).
> it's a short article that doesn't answer its own question that it poses ("Why isn't this getting fixed?")
It literally did - "Few want to make it harder or costlier for data to flow from their network into others."
Margins are low in the telecom industry (11.4%) [0] versus Software's 80-90% margins due to the massive capital expenditures needed to build out a 5G backbone and deprecate older 2/3G infrastructure.
Adding traffic filtering (basically a SSE style Deep Packet Inspection functionality) is legitimately expensive because building this functionality in house is a multi-million venture which is difficult to justify with such low margins, and the vendors like ZScaler, Fortinet, Cato, Cisco, etc in this space all know they can arm-twist telcos while keep the price below that to build in-house.
> is it directed at me, or who
Yes, but a lot of other HN commenters like you. I used to be a SWE as well before I went into product/sales and later finance, and I hate it how a subset of SWEs like you assume us "non-techies" don't know jack.
Journalism is built on top of sources and experts who want to remain anonymous. Trust it or don't.
And writers at The Economist absolutely do interact with experts in the fields they write articles about. A lot of us just don't want to be named for the reasons I mentioned above.
They are a news source, not a published journal. The NYT does not publish sources or citations either.
Also, I absolutely would NOT want to be cited when I chat with journalists from a competitive standpoint (I've given a signal to my portfolio's competitors who I'm targeting), conflict of interest standpoint (the owner of the publication I'm talking to might have a financial interest in a competitor or my products), and a journalistic standpoint (anonymity of sources allows us to speak honestly).
> it's a short article that doesn't answer its own question that it poses ("Why isn't this getting fixed?")
It literally did - "Few want to make it harder or costlier for data to flow from their network into others."
Margins are low in the telecom industry (11.4%) [0] versus Software's 80-90% margins due to the massive capital expenditures needed to build out a 5G backbone and deprecate older 2/3G infrastructure.
Adding traffic filtering (basically a SSE style Deep Packet Inspection functionality) is legitimately expensive because building this functionality in house is a multi-million venture which is difficult to justify with such low margins, and the vendors like ZScaler, Fortinet, Cato, Cisco, etc in this space all know they can arm-twist telcos while keep the price below that to build in-house.
> is it directed at me, or who
Yes, but a lot of other HN commenters like you. I used to be a SWE as well before I went into product/sales and later finance, and I hate it how a subset of SWEs like you assume us "non-techies" don't know jack.
Journalism is built on top of sources and experts who want to remain anonymous. Trust it or don't.
And writers at The Economist absolutely do interact with experts in the fields they write articles about. A lot of us just don't want to be named for the reasons I mentioned above.
[0] - https://www.mtn-c.com/product/telcos-pay-5g-price-higher-deb...