95% of User-Generated Content Is Bogus
coomaria writes "The HoneyGrid scans 40 million Web sites and 10 million emails, so it was bound to find something interesting. Among the things it found was that a staggering 95% of User Generated Content is either malicious in nature or spam." Here is the report's front door; to read the actual report you'll have to give up name, rank, and serial number.
Animals shit in ~95% of their habitat...
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
I got ripped in 2 weeks. learn how with secret juice formula.
That is so untrue. There is value in what I write.
We know.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
95% of humans are over 100 years old. Most of them are dead.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
...95% probability actually. So I didn't bother.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
I guess that goes in hand with 95% of kdawson's submissions being crap and not worth the time.
Be seeing you...
That should be on Fox News.
"Number of dead people reaches all time high!"
Well, then MSNBC would just rip into Fox for inferring these unfortunate individuals should no longer vote. CNN would chime in and blame the lack of universal health care for the deaths.
In human terms, the majority of computers have AIDS. And we all know where they caught it.
Your mom?
Out of the 5% that are not generated by spambots, 99% is still generated by idiots.
Oh god, are they okay?
Are you implying that Wikipedia is not bogus content?
Sturgeon just had low standards.
And when they want a change from that, they come here.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I take it that means there is a 95% chance that this report is bogus, or malicious?
Insightful and funny are really the same thing, except one has a punch line.
I'll have to change it from "Everything" to "95% of everything". :-(
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.