samegreatsleeve

8 ms·

1.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Britannica costs $5 a month. Their articles are excellent. A free source written by top philosphers is Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy. That should be the first hit. If Wikipedia wants to be a link farm with citations and links to every
2.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Understand that it isn't MY problem. I find it easy to avoid wikipedia because I know how to do things like -wikipedia. But I'm not the vulnerable population. Most people don't know to do that, and just think wiki info is fine when it's not
3.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
What does "unhealthy" in this context mean? Aristocracy is the norm for human civilization. I don't get why people are so chicken little about it. When your citizens are disgustingly wealthy they aren't going to have trouble buying those th
4.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
The experts aren't bing silenced, they just show up on the second page of google so get no hits. The first page will often have literally 5+ links to wikipedia, and those articles will cite the never-visited reliable page but get a lot of t
5.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
So wikipedia is a low quality content farm that shows up for every google search and prevents actual expert pages from being seen--taking revenue and visibility from experts--while providing lower quality content. And that's a good thing to
6.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
[citation needed] wikipedia'd!
7.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Haha, I was thinking the same about you. If you're a troll I give you credit: you know exactly how to impersonate the stupidity of a Wikipedia true believer. Asking for citations when they're not relevant. Ironic use of logical fallacies. S
8.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Really. You're really going to use that logical fallacy to support the religion for which you are a true believer. The delicious irony of your hatred is that your point is so poorly argued, you must be a wikipedia editor. I'm actually a pre
9.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Absolutely none of your comment is true; it reflects an unexamined bias and a complete unfamiliarity with the depths of wikipedia, how wikipedia stands up to alternatives, and the nature of the shitty content on wikipedia. Your opinion is c
10.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Britannica actually accepts user generated content. They are superior to wikipedia, however, in that they have credible experts vet the content. The complaint about wikipedia is that it fails to live up to its ideals. If you had ever been a
11.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Isn't non-notable knowledge still knowledge? They are only interested in a small slice of human knowledge by their own sated goals.
12.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
It's inaccurate to say that wikipedia is fact checked or verified. The existence of a citation does not imply the existence of a fact check or a verification, or verifiability. Even when citations are high quality, the info they're supporti
13.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Your comment is itself a negative, middlebrow dismissal. The OPs negativity is middlebrow precisely because it's accurate, but it's beating a dead horse. This means it gets up voted repeatedly, whereas a genuinely low brow comment like "FUK
14.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
The genealogists are always happy to share their data. It's part of the culture. There's no open source genealogy programmers because the young nerds that do open source dont care about genealogy.
15.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
So a soft DOS then. Not much of a solution, still fully exploitable.
16.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
He didn't say cut off an IP address.
17.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Paper doesn't harm the environment. Most lumber from NA is carbon neutral at worst, carbon capturing at best
18.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
That's like saying to get someone to stop punching you, just punch yourself. DOSing yourself to stop a DOS :/
19.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Some people have bad ears. Others have bad speakers/headphones. You are probably both if you really believe that.
20.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
The Princess Bride is extremely popular among 20-40 year olds in the Anglosphere. Australia, Canada, USA, UK. This narrows down your search for the Dread Pirate Roberts to like 150 million people. So the fact that this English speaking Silk
21.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Retrograde amnesia doesn't impair implicit memory. Priming effects are still shown for amnesiac people. This means that you'll be able to relearn your skills much more rapidly the second time around. As far as the best way to do that, I wou
22.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
You may be right about WISPs. I was referring to cellular networks and wired networks. I'm guessing the hurdle is still legal/political. I'm gonna look into this, thanks for the insight
23.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
It's only a separate economy to the extent that it isn't instantly being converted back into some other currency. There is a genuine bitcoin economy, and it is centered around the trade of goods that are illegal: child porn, weapons, viru
24.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
>Traders learn; they adjust with respect to risk. Ha ha ha ha No. Traders learn, and then they die , and are replaced by new traders, who haven't learned.
25.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
what rural telco is building their own network? in canada, the taxpayers built the network, then a corrupt government signed it over to a private cartel so they could charge rent. it sounds like you're making some kind of Ayn Rand free mark
26.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
You're kidding right? The issue is not a lack of entrepreneurs.
27.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
How is it a final battle? The plutocracy is not going anywhere. It is the new organizational principle for the Earth and it will last 2000 years just as the previous organizational principle did.
28.
by samegreatsleeve 13y ago
Why do you guys buy into this 10k hours bullshit? The 10k hours claim is utter nonsense on the most basic level. How exactly is "one skill" defined? There is no such thing as "one skill." Every skill, field, whatever is a highly complex ama