27 Apr
2018
27 Apr
'18
3:13 p.m.
Dave Horsfall <dave(a)horsfall.org> wrote:
|On Wed, 25 Apr 2018, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|
|>|To be fair, Wikipedia is relatively accurate. And if you find
|>|something wrong in it and don't fix it, you have only yourself to
|>|blame.
|>
|> It is not that easy. For example there are people which "sit"
|> there for a long time. Not all of them are good. [...]
|
|Wikipedia simply cannot be trusted (as if it ever could).
|
|You will get some imbecile who thinks that they "own" that topic, and when
|you challenge said moron because you happen to have personal information
|i.e. you were *there* at the time then the coward will simply block you.
|
|Wikipedia is only as accurate as the last idiot who updated it.
Unfortunately all reference texts like Encyclopedia Britannica now
only exist in online versions; the Encyclopedia Britannica was one
of the first i think (according to [1] computer mouse is even as
old as 1963-64!), the "Fischer Weltalmanach" the last i know of;
mourning of loss in German at [2], titled "A Victim on the Altar
of Availability"; me too: when i was young it was of value to have
an entire cupboard of editorially edited general knowledge at
home.
[1] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Douglas-Engelbart
[2]
https://derstandard.at/2000077097204/Fischer-Weltalmanach-Ein-Opfer-auf-dem…
--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)