Yours first: it is a new paper. It was just released. It has an "October 2015" dateline. It isn't a variant of any previous paper she's released. It's also a very good paper.
Second: this isn't a blog post. It's not a news site. It's a research paper. She gave it a title that follows a trope in computer science paper titles. It's silly to call it "clickbait".
As someone who's had the misfortune of going toe-to-toe with Rutkowska over details of the X86 architecture, let me gently suggest that whether she knows what she's talking about and what she's trying to say [isn't] really a fight you want to pick.
I was not criticizing the quality of information in the paper or article. I was criticizing the summary previously displayed on HN before it was changed, which suggests that someone agrees with me.
It was a narrow complaint about the title as submitted to HN - the current title "Intel x86 considered harmful – survey of attacks against x86 over last 10 years" is a lot more insightful as to the nature of the article, and less inflammatory (although I'd guess that it was unintentional).