GENERAL NEW RELEASE SPECULATION TOPIC PART II

[Burning Shadow]

14th of June is the next big date to watch - less than a month away.

This is when Warp have their Barbican event

https://www.barbican.org.uk/whats-on/20 ... -happening

No indication (although there was speculation) that BoC will appear, but I’d say that if there is a release planned for 2025 this is the perfect occasion for a teaser or some sort of video, similar to how the Reach for the Dead video was premiered in Shibuya.

[dogtemple]

I’m hopeful for this, if anything solid via warp is going to happen any time soon the barbican event will be it.

I can imagine some sort of interlude and hexagons being projected on a screen with a hint of some kind for a few seconds or something like that.

Doubt they will arrive out of the blue and do a live set with a signing and Q&A but something else to get people stirred up about something happening I think is looking more likely.

[Stavorius]

My two cents is that BoC will not be at the Barbican Warp event, but that there is a strong chance there will be a video hint there that kicks this whole thing into another gear, just like with TH.

I'll say it again.

[zeitgeist]

...
CALLING ALL WEB DEVS!!!!!
I know just enough about html and css to see that there is something fishy going on in this stylesheet.
...

IT Engineer here--the Cosecha HTML document is not actually referencing any CSS stylesheet. The CSS you're looking at is a default CSS artifact added because you're using Firefox to browse the site. It's part of Firefox's Gecko Engine--here's the exact file in their GitHub repo: https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev/blob/e51daa6f33122c66c59a9dc8080807ba1c003131/layout/style/res/plaintext.css#L26. If you use another browser (Chrome), you'll notice this same CSS is not imported.

Since the page also is not running any server-side Javascript (no <script> tags within the HTML), you cannot have any impact on the site by using the Developer Console in your browser, in the ways that you may be implying. There's nothing you can inject or actually manipulate from your end to produce a different response from the server.

It's also common to use CloudFlare to redirect any sub-path(s) on a domain back to the root domain, returning an HTTP200 success code, especially for small static "landing-sites" like this. Part of the reason can be preventing people from trying to discover unintentionally-unprotected services behind a domain (why something like `https://cosecha-transmisiones.com/asdf/qwerty/hello-world` just redirects back).

Though it wasn't your comment, the "hexagonal IP address arrangement" is unfortunately erroneous as well. Running a nameserver lookup on the Cosecha site does return 7 IP addresses, which are indeed hosted behind CloudFlare. They're one of the world's biggest internet hosts, and you're receiving a DNS lookup response for the SF Bay Area's Silicon Valley, though that doesn't indicate a geographical intention on the part of the bros. The actual data center serving the site happens at a different routing layer than DNS, it will serve the site from a node closest to the person requesting it. Generally speaking, any reverse IP lookup tool showing GPS coordinates or physical addresses are going to be approximate at best. They spend a lot of money to obfuscate the actual locations of their data centers.

[Fredd-E]

a new like surfaced today, the first since April 20th, same topic

[Davism]

Great news!

Again, a like referencing the new album. So obvious.

[northernlite]

...
CALLING ALL WEB DEVS!!!!!
I know just enough about html and css to see that there is something fishy going on in this stylesheet.
...

IT Engineer here--the Cosecha HTML document is not actually referencing any CSS stylesheet. The CSS you're looking at is a default CSS artifact added because you're using Firefox to browse the site. It's part of Firefox's Gecko Engine--here's the exact file in their GitHub repo: https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev/blob/e51daa6f33122c66c59a9dc8080807ba1c003131/layout/style/res/plaintext.css#L26. If you use another browser (Chrome), you'll notice this same CSS is not imported.

Since the page also is not running any server-side Javascript (no <script> tags within the HTML), you cannot have any impact on the site by using the Developer Console in your browser, in the ways that you may be implying. There's nothing you can inject or actually manipulate from your end to produce a different response from the server.

It's also common to use CloudFlare to redirect any sub-path(s) on a domain back to the root domain, returning an HTTP200 success code, especially for small static "landing-sites" like this. Part of the reason can be preventing people from trying to discover unintentionally-unprotected services behind a domain (why something like `https://cosecha-transmisiones.com/asdf/qwerty/hello-world` just redirects back).

Though it wasn't your comment, the "hexagonal IP address arrangement" is unfortunately erroneous as well. Running a nameserver lookup on the Cosecha site does return 7 IP addresses, which are indeed hosted behind CloudFlare. They're one of the world's biggest internet hosts, and you're receiving a DNS lookup response for the SF Bay Area's Silicon Valley, though that doesn't indicate a geographical intention on the part of the bros. The actual data center serving the site happens at a different routing layer than DNS, it will serve the site from a node closest to the person requesting it. Generally speaking, any reverse IP lookup tool showing GPS coordinates or physical addresses are going to be approximate at best. They spend a lot of money to obfuscate the actual locations of their data centers.

+1

can confirm, i've been wanting to chime in and put that suspicion to rest. thank you for writing it up!

[Fredd-E]

Another like, possibly also liked on 2025-05-17



Who's still patiently waiting?

[Davism]

They are doing everything possible to tell us something is coming without giving too much info. Very encouraging and thanks for posting, Fred.

[WATER_CAN-_-]

So far still inclined to think

... --- ...

phpBB [media]

[mr_udders]

cosecha-transmisiones.com is now giving an error 522. Make of that what you will...

[chorus]

cosecha-transmisiones.com is now giving an error 522. Make of that what you will...

I take that as a definitive confirmation of information coming May 22th!

[outhudd]

cosecha-transmisiones.com is now giving an error 522. Make of that what you will...

I take that as a definitive confirmation of information coming May 22th!

[ webdev twitching intensifies... ]

[Davism]

So weird.

I cannot accept that this means anything other than they are preparing a new way to lead us to the next chapter.

[Ando Laj]

They are so excited to tell us about the new album that in their giddiness their fingers slipped and they accidentally broke the website instead of posting the announcement. Consider it announced

[Alvin]

My physical copy of Tomorrow’s Harvest just vanished.

[hexagonFox]

Down for me as well

[bizcastl]

off to the pub... /// --- ..-. ..-. / - --- / - .... . / .--. ..- -... .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-

[niski]

cosecha-transmisiones.com is now giving an error 522. Make of that what you will...

FYI: for the past 9 years before the "nobody home" change, error 522 ("gateway timeout") was what was displaying interchangeably with a 404 occasionally (presumably when they had the server for the site running, without the actual site's resource up?) on the website

[2020k]

cosecha-transmisiones.com is now giving an error 522. Make of that what you will...

FYI: for the past 9 years before the "nobody home" change, error 522 ("gateway timeout") was what was displaying interchangeably with a 404 occasionally (presumably when they had the server for the site running, without the actual site's resource up?) on the website

We'll probably know in the next couple of days as to whether this is intentional marketing or if BOC got mad that we all thought it was a new record and told WARP to pull the website.

Honestly, either outcome excites me.