> but it is very possible that beliefs that are more in line with reality often help an individual's survival.
Sorry, but that's not very convincing to me. You should give better arguments or evidence than just hand-waving suppositions. After all:
1) Lots of living things are doing very well without an accurate picture of reality (many don't appear to even have minds), and have been doing well for millions or even billions of years. Despite not knowing stuff like the Theory of Relativity they are more likely than humans to be still around 1 billion years from now. That's even more so if the panspermia theory turns out to be true (we're less likely to survive eons traveling in space after our sun has died out, whereas bacteria or whatever it is, have "been there done that").
Intelligence and "clear thinking" is way overrated. Humans have yet to prove that it's such a great thing in evolutionary fitness terms. We've only been around for a very short time. If we are still thriving 1 billion years from now and are still intelligent creatures, then that'll prove it enough for me. The dinosaurs were around for 160 million years, they're extinct now. Modern birds are rather different from those dinosaurs - what worked for those dinosaurs back then obviously didn't work well enough - since the surviving descendants are so different.
2) As I already mentioned scientists have found that the placebo effect/response is powerful. Knowing that a "painkiller" is just saline isn't going to help you even if it's more in line with reality. In many scenarios placebos work very well (and usually with fewer harmful side effects). This can help in the individual's or group's survival.
3) People can hold contradictory/conflicting beliefs. Someone could be religious and thus apparently delusional to atheists, while having a more accurate picture of reality in other scenarios than the average atheist. After all many atheists are delusional given they actually believe what some prominent atheists say[1][2].
[1] For example: Steven Weinberg: "With or without [religion] you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion."
Which is clearly wrong, given: i) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment ii) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment (see the _real_ variation by Charles Sheridan and Richard King involving a puppy actually getting real electric shocks). iii) Lots of atheist communists did lots of evil stuff when following the belief system called Communism (which is widely regarded as not being a religion).
Of course that statement might be correct, if good people are a small minority in the world (about 20% and mainly males based on the puppy experiment;) ), and you regard Communism as a religion. But using that reasoning you could also claim the religious people doing evil things aren't actually good people.
[2] Richard Dawkins in "The God Delusion": "Atheists should be proud, not apologetic, because atheism is evidence of a healthy, independent, rational mind"
Which ironically is a rather delusional and self-contradicting remark. If the remark really is true, doctors should just convince people with unhealthy minds to be atheists and voila they'll have healthy, independent, rational minds.
Assuming that Dawkins is really an atheist, that statement proves that not all atheists have such rational minds. And at least one of his beliefs is not in line with reality;).
Decent editors can wrap lines (and let you know they are wrapped). So they're not forcing you to scroll left and right, unless you're using a really crap editor. Most text editors can wrap. Even Windows Notepad can.
By forcing everyone to 80 characters, you're forcing everyone to code the same way you do. By breaking lines at 80 characters, you're forcing some of them to scroll up and down when they wouldn't have to. Not so many editors can unwrap forcibly broken lines.
So forcing 80 character lines is very inconsiderate to the rest of the team.
It's easier to read code when you don't have to keep scrolling up and down. You can just stare and concentrate at stuff on the screen till it makes sense.
As for the convention of: {
}
That wastes a line and increases the amount of scrolling you have to do, for very little gain in code clarity.
I prefer to use tabs and leave tabs as tabs. Then everyone can have the indentation to be has much or as little as they want (so that it can fit on their narrow or wide screens).
Then put a comment at the top saying how many "spaces" your tab is (or where your tab stops are), then others can read stuff the way you wrote it and still be able to switch to whatever they like.
But it's a fact that most people are not always at their smartest all the time. And those that are at their smartest all the time, aren't usually smart.
So when you write really clever code when you are one of your peak points, you better be smart enough to explain it to your dumb self some time later when some thing needs to be changed (even if it isn't actually affected, you might not remember or understand anymore the reasons that it isn't affected;) ).
"It defines blasphemy as "publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted"."
It says ANY religion. So what religions are legally recognized in Ireland? How about Scientology? Is there are list somewhere?
There are a fair number of religions that have a high proportion of adherents who are easily outraged.
> we're hoping that at some point they'll just vanish from the scene because their beliefs make them look too ridiculous to get laid.
1) You have great faith;).
2) Getting laid is not the crucial bit for evolution, reproducing successfully is. I can see many scenarios where the atheists get laid more often, while the religious reproduced more often or successfully (in evolutionary terms[1]).
3) I think the stats indicate a trend in a rather different direction when it comes to reproduction.
4) You may be happy to know that a large number of Christians believe they'll just vanish from the scene- for different reasons.;)
[1] In more personal terms some might view it as a failure - albeit in contraception.
I've always wondered whether the NSA is buying billions of dollars of Ads from Google, or various other companies:).
They can always get the money. The US military has "black budgets". The US Federal Reserve refuses to disclose where trillions of US dollars has gone to and only a few people are kicking up a fuss about it (there's a persistent senator and even Bloomberg has tried, but they're not getting much traction - the citizens care more about the notorious bonuses which are much smaller in amount).
So it's a matter of whether they can disguise the transfer well enough.
That said, google should be able to make a lot of $$$$ if they ever dealt in stocks and other financial stuff, and used what they know. While it's not quite insider trading, they do have an advantage. And they could do something innocuous and profit from it: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/09/six-year-old-st/
I doubt they do the second thing though. As for the first case, I do wonder who are buying all those ads - I know a fair number are, but fact is google typically finds your organization and products well enough without you needing to advertise.
> but rather the dying spasm of an evolutionary adaptation that's no longer necessary.
Evolution is less about removing "no longer necessary", and more about removing "kills you", and keeping "if it works well enough", or "gives an advantage".
As for "dying spasm" and evolution, I'll ask this:
Does Atheism really give the atheist group more/greater evolutionary advantages and fewer disadvantages than groups belonging to the major religious beliefs?
Atheists have fewer ways to take advantage of the very powerful placebo effect[1] ( they also don't have the convenience of "invisible omnipresent person"- unless they somehow really believe in the FSM;) ).
And they aren't that much less likely to get killed by some religious nutcase.
So it seems to me that the religious bunch might be around for quite a while yet. Why do you think they would be more likely to die out than the atheists?
They could be the thought pattern you get when you see a particular image (or face).
Then you tell the computer to associate it with the picture/video the computer sees in its camera (shared with you for augmented reality), or recorded audio clip. So the next time you tell the computer, "<command mode start>fetch <thought pattern><go><command mode end>", the computer will fetch the relevant object.
Of course with stuff like DRM and restrictive copyright laws, it's going to be a bit harder and not so nice;).
It won't be just a penny for "your thoughts", after all they'll say legally those aren't your thoughts.
You clearly need an "escape sequence":). e.g. you only switch to speech mode, when you think of something you've predefined as the "start" escape sequence. Then you get out by thinking of the "stop".
You could also have a "command mode", then that sends commands to the computer so that you can do stuff - then you get virtual telepathy and telekinesis.
Thought macros will help make things faster. Instead of thinking every little character of a command sequence, you'd use macros.
When F22 fighter planes have stupid bugs that cause problems on crossing the international date line, I can't really have that much confidence that planes won't be falling out of sky on 2038;).
So far have there actually been attacks your IPS systems have _stopped at your sites that would have actually caused problems - wouldn't have been shrugged off by your servers being not vulnerable in the first place (patched, not vulnerable to SQL injection etc).
I'm just wondering how much security and availability they'd really add over just having a firewall (some even have IPS features themselves, but let's ignore that for now).
Can they usually spot AND prevent attacks before they are patchable?
It's like network equivalent of antivirus software - need to update "signatures" very regularly. But with a harder performance constraint.
So I'm wondering if they can actually succeed in keeping up in practice.
If you look at the Two Parties combined, they had >97% of all the votes in the 2008 and 2004 US elections. Google for the results.
The US voters are mostly two factions who support one of the two parties.
Those who don't vote, don't count - but if they actually bothered they could actually make a change - the numbers of eligible voters who don't vote outnumber a single faction of voters. If they actually voted, even if it's spread out across different candidates who don't win, the Two Parties might change what they do so they go back to >97%.
As it is, why should the Two Parties change the way they do stuff when they get nearly 100% of the votes? That'll be a crazy thing to do right?
Despite what the article writer thinks, if PCM is that great, the storage manufacturers will just create storage devices that use PCM technology. The other option is to go out of business;).
I see lots of "normal" people using external storage drives. These people are far less likely to open up their computer and swap chips on their motherboard.
Transferring 1TB from my house to my office by hand is faster and more reliable than using my crappy ISP. If the writer thinks storage IO speeds are bad, he should look at the internet speeds in many parts of the world.
Having your storage on a "drive" makes it easier to upgrade (or even hot-swap), than having it on the motherboard.
Motherboards that allow you to hot swap memory or CPUs tend to be expensive.
Also, stuff that plugs into one motherboard can't always be plugged into next year's new technology motherboard.
Trust me, being able to read the same drive on a totally different computer is something very important.
By the time you've designed a suitable interface, storage format, protocols and physical connectors for all of that, the stuff that plugs into it might as well be called a drive.
And whatever you call it, the storage companies will be building it.
FWIW, I do hope that storage I/O speeds increase dramatically, and very soon. It's already 2010, progress has been rather slow IMO;).
If Apophis gets really dangerously close in 2036, you could plan to be dead before it hits.
In which case you would not be there...
Of course, this plan doesn't really require you to have a telescope or figure out where it lands, unless you don't trust the scientists if they predict the impact is 3 days away with 99.99999% certainty;).
They should see which groups of people are more compatible with the placebo response/effect.
As the article notes the placebo effect can be very powerful.
Thus I also suspect that having certain sorts of religions or belief systems may be advantageous, since it means you don't actually need a 3rd party to actually physically administer something to you (or pretend to).
For example, a member that believed the FSM or God has helped him, might still be able to function and be useful to his group despite injury - experiencing no incapacitating pain. Or even actually heal better than normal.
Thus groups consisting of such members might be "evolutionarily fitter" and more likely to survive over generations.
In contrast an atheist might not be able to access such an effect as easily - and require a device or procedure. Unless of course there's a medical tech breakthrough - which might happen if the researchers figure out more about the placebo response/effect. It is likely to still require an actual external device/treatment, but it should be better than the placebo in effect or reliability.
> The fact that handwriting(good cursive legible and fast handwriting, not childish all caps block letters!) is a fading skill > is proof of how human intelligence is the only really fading skill..
I doubt Stephen Hawking has good handwriting.
It is likely that he is above average in intelligence, despite his handwriting being way below average.
Yes there are a lot of stupid and ignorant people around. Big deal, intelligence is overrated.
Putting everything in at the start allows the a company to prepare the training programs, a whole bunch of documentation and helpdesk scripts much earlier.
Better than waiting for extensions to be created and pass some vetting process - since people might create more than one extension to do very similar things, and of variable quality.
And that's why some stuff is more "Enterprise" friendly, and other stuff isn't.
Lots of people out there don't really care about computers or what an operating system is, they just want to get their jobs done, get $$$ and get on with their lives.
As for the OPs talk about "open enough so the state can listen to any citizen's conversation", the government can already listen in - they don't need to crack stuff since GSM stuff is already decrypted at the towers.
AFAIK, GSM encryption is only used between the phone and the tower. After that the conversations or messages travel unencrypted through the rest of the network.
> For true realism try Americas Army 3, the slightest bullet wound can leave you slowly bleeding to death.
Do you also get air-dropped off at the wrong spot, and have to walk for hours to the actual battle zone, only to then get killed by your own side's trigger happy pilots?
Slashdot Mirror
> If you're and Ancient, how come you didn't ascend with the rest of them.
Like other slashdotters, he's still staying with his Mummy in the basement.
> but it is very possible that beliefs that are more in line with reality often help an individual's survival.
Sorry, but that's not very convincing to me. You should give better arguments or evidence than just hand-waving suppositions. After all:
1) Lots of living things are doing very well without an accurate picture of reality (many don't appear to even have minds), and have been doing well for millions or even billions of years. Despite not knowing stuff like the Theory of Relativity they are more likely than humans to be still around 1 billion years from now. That's even more so if the panspermia theory turns out to be true (we're less likely to survive eons traveling in space after our sun has died out, whereas bacteria or whatever it is, have "been there done that").
Intelligence and "clear thinking" is way overrated. Humans have yet to prove that it's such a great thing in evolutionary fitness terms. We've only been around for a very short time. If we are still thriving 1 billion years from now and are still intelligent creatures, then that'll prove it enough for me. The dinosaurs were around for 160 million years, they're extinct now. Modern birds are rather different from those dinosaurs - what worked for those dinosaurs back then obviously didn't work well enough - since the surviving descendants are so different.
2) As I already mentioned scientists have found that the placebo effect/response is powerful. Knowing that a "painkiller" is just saline isn't going to help you even if it's more in line with reality. In many scenarios placebos work very well (and usually with fewer harmful side effects). This can help in the individual's or group's survival.
3) People can hold contradictory/conflicting beliefs. Someone could be religious and thus apparently delusional to atheists, while having a more accurate picture of reality in other scenarios than the average atheist. After all many atheists are delusional given they actually believe what some prominent atheists say[1][2].
[1] For example: Steven Weinberg: "With or without [religion] you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion."
Which is clearly wrong, given:
i) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
ii) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment (see the _real_ variation by Charles Sheridan and Richard King involving a puppy actually getting real electric shocks).
iii) Lots of atheist communists did lots of evil stuff when following the belief system called Communism (which is widely regarded as not being a religion).
Of course that statement might be correct, if good people are a small minority in the world (about 20% and mainly males based on the puppy experiment ;) ), and you regard Communism as a religion. But using that reasoning you could also claim the religious people doing evil things aren't actually good people.
[2] Richard Dawkins in "The God Delusion": "Atheists should be proud, not apologetic, because atheism is evidence of a healthy, independent, rational mind"
Which ironically is a rather delusional and self-contradicting remark. If the remark really is true, doctors should just convince people with unhealthy minds to be atheists and voila they'll have healthy, independent, rational minds.
Assuming that Dawkins is really an atheist, that statement proves that not all atheists have such rational minds. And at least one of his beliefs is not in line with reality ;).
Decent editors can wrap lines (and let you know they are wrapped). So they're not forcing you to scroll left and right, unless you're using a really crap editor. Most text editors can wrap. Even Windows Notepad can.
By forcing everyone to 80 characters, you're forcing everyone to code the same way you do. By breaking lines at 80 characters, you're forcing some of them to scroll up and down when they wouldn't have to. Not so many editors can unwrap forcibly broken lines.
So forcing 80 character lines is very inconsiderate to the rest of the team.
It's easier to read code when you don't have to keep scrolling up and down. You can just stare and concentrate at stuff on the screen till it makes sense.
As for the convention of:
{
}
That wastes a line and increases the amount of scrolling you have to do, for very little gain in code clarity.
I prefer to use tabs and leave tabs as tabs. Then everyone can have the indentation to be has much or as little as they want (so that it can fit on their narrow or wide screens).
Then put a comment at the top saying how many "spaces" your tab is (or where your tab stops are), then others can read stuff the way you wrote it and still be able to switch to whatever they like.
But it's a fact that most people are not always at their smartest all the time. And those that are at their smartest all the time, aren't usually smart.
;) ).
So when you write really clever code when you are one of your peak points, you better be smart enough to explain it to your dumb self some time later when some thing needs to be changed (even if it isn't actually affected, you might not remember or understand anymore the reasons that it isn't affected
How sure are you?
"It defines blasphemy as "publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted"."
It says ANY religion. So what religions are legally recognized in Ireland? How about Scientology? Is there are list somewhere?
There are a fair number of religions that have a high proportion of adherents who are easily outraged.
> we're hoping that at some point they'll just vanish from the scene because their beliefs make them look too ridiculous to get laid.
;).
;)
1) You have great faith
2) Getting laid is not the crucial bit for evolution, reproducing successfully is. I can see many scenarios where the atheists get laid more often, while the religious reproduced more often or successfully (in evolutionary terms[1]).
3) I think the stats indicate a trend in a rather different direction when it comes to reproduction.
4) You may be happy to know that a large number of Christians believe they'll just vanish from the scene- for different reasons.
[1] In more personal terms some might view it as a failure - albeit in contraception.
I've always wondered whether the NSA is buying billions of dollars of Ads from Google, or various other companies :).
They can always get the money. The US military has "black budgets". The US Federal Reserve refuses to disclose where trillions of US dollars has gone to and only a few people are kicking up a fuss about it (there's a persistent senator and even Bloomberg has tried, but they're not getting much traction - the citizens care more about the notorious bonuses which are much smaller in amount).
So it's a matter of whether they can disguise the transfer well enough.
That said, google should be able to make a lot of $$$$ if they ever dealt in stocks and other financial stuff, and used what they know. While it's not quite insider trading, they do have an advantage. And they could do something innocuous and profit from it: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/09/six-year-old-st/
I doubt they do the second thing though. As for the first case, I do wonder who are buying all those ads - I know a fair number are, but fact is google typically finds your organization and products well enough without you needing to advertise.
> but rather the dying spasm of an evolutionary adaptation that's no longer necessary.
Evolution is less about removing "no longer necessary", and more about removing "kills you", and keeping "if it works well enough", or "gives an advantage".
As for "dying spasm" and evolution, I'll ask this:
Does Atheism really give the atheist group more/greater evolutionary advantages and fewer disadvantages than groups belonging to the major religious beliefs?
Atheists have fewer ways to take advantage of the very powerful placebo effect[1] ( they also don't have the convenience of "invisible omnipresent person"- unless they somehow really believe in the FSM ;) ).
And they aren't that much less likely to get killed by some religious nutcase.
So it seems to me that the religious bunch might be around for quite a while yet. Why do you think they would be more likely to die out than the atheists?
[1] Which appears to be getting stronger in some cases! http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo_effect?currentPage=all
I detect yellow bile as the colour and flavour here... ;)
They don't even have to be words.
;).
They could be the thought pattern you get when you see a particular image (or face).
Then you tell the computer to associate it with the picture/video the computer sees in its camera (shared with you for augmented reality), or recorded audio clip. So the next time you tell the computer, "<command mode start>fetch <thought pattern><go><command mode end>", the computer will fetch the relevant object.
Of course with stuff like DRM and restrictive copyright laws, it's going to be a bit harder and not so nice
It won't be just a penny for "your thoughts", after all they'll say legally those aren't your thoughts.
You clearly need an "escape sequence" :). e.g. you only switch to speech mode, when you think of something you've predefined as the "start" escape sequence. Then you get out by thinking of the "stop".
You could also have a "command mode", then that sends commands to the computer so that you can do stuff - then you get virtual telepathy and telekinesis.
Thought macros will help make things faster. Instead of thinking every little character of a command sequence, you'd use macros.
See this:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/25/2038217
When F22 fighter planes have stupid bugs that cause problems on crossing the international date line, I can't really have that much confidence that planes won't be falling out of sky on 2038 ;).
Say it's HTTP only. What can they do for you?
So far have there actually been attacks your IPS systems have _stopped at your sites that would have actually caused problems - wouldn't have been shrugged off by your servers being not vulnerable in the first place (patched, not vulnerable to SQL injection etc).
I'm just wondering how much security and availability they'd really add over just having a firewall (some even have IPS features themselves, but let's ignore that for now).
Can they usually spot AND prevent attacks before they are patchable?
It's like network equivalent of antivirus software - need to update "signatures" very regularly. But with a harder performance constraint.
So I'm wondering if they can actually succeed in keeping up in practice.
It's not just the buying.
If you look at the Two Parties combined, they had >97% of all the votes in the 2008 and 2004 US elections. Google for the results.
The US voters are mostly two factions who support one of the two parties.
Those who don't vote, don't count - but if they actually bothered they could actually make a change - the numbers of eligible voters who don't vote outnumber a single faction of voters. If they actually voted, even if it's spread out across different candidates who don't win, the Two Parties might change what they do so they go back to >97%.
As it is, why should the Two Parties change the way they do stuff when they get nearly 100% of the votes? That'll be a crazy thing to do right?
Yes, seriously.
;).
;).
Despite what the article writer thinks, if PCM is that great, the storage manufacturers will just create storage devices that use PCM technology. The other option is to go out of business
I see lots of "normal" people using external storage drives. These people are far less likely to open up their computer and swap chips on their motherboard.
Transferring 1TB from my house to my office by hand is faster and more reliable than using my crappy ISP. If the writer thinks storage IO speeds are bad, he should look at the internet speeds in many parts of the world.
Having your storage on a "drive" makes it easier to upgrade (or even hot-swap), than having it on the motherboard.
Motherboards that allow you to hot swap memory or CPUs tend to be expensive.
Also, stuff that plugs into one motherboard can't always be plugged into next year's new technology motherboard.
Trust me, being able to read the same drive on a totally different computer is something very important.
By the time you've designed a suitable interface, storage format, protocols and physical connectors for all of that, the stuff that plugs into it might as well be called a drive.
And whatever you call it, the storage companies will be building it.
FWIW, I do hope that storage I/O speeds increase dramatically, and very soon. It's already 2010, progress has been rather slow IMO
If Apophis gets really dangerously close in 2036, you could plan to be dead before it hits.
;).
In which case you would not be there...
Of course, this plan doesn't really require you to have a telescope or figure out where it lands, unless you don't trust the scientists if they predict the impact is 3 days away with 99.99999% certainty
I found this somewhat interesting:
http://www.geocities.jp/takascience/lego/fabs_en.html
The Red Ring of Death may still be remembered well into the next decade.
;).
IMO that's about the most memorable and defining thing about the xbox 360
FWIW, "exploding" batteries from various gadgets were rather more common in this decade than previous decades.
They should see which groups of people are more compatible with the placebo response/effect.
As the article notes the placebo effect can be very powerful.
Thus I also suspect that having certain sorts of religions or belief systems may be advantageous, since it means you don't actually need a 3rd party to actually physically administer something to you (or pretend to).
For example, a member that believed the FSM or God has helped him, might still be able to function and be useful to his group despite injury - experiencing no incapacitating pain. Or even actually heal better than normal.
Thus groups consisting of such members might be "evolutionarily fitter" and more likely to survive over generations.
In contrast an atheist might not be able to access such an effect as easily - and require a device or procedure. Unless of course there's a medical tech breakthrough - which might happen if the researchers figure out more about the placebo response/effect. It is likely to still require an actual external device/treatment, but it should be better than the placebo in effect or reliability.
> The fact that handwriting(good cursive legible and fast handwriting, not childish all caps block letters!) is a fading skill
> is proof of how human intelligence is the only really fading skill..
I doubt Stephen Hawking has good handwriting.
It is likely that he is above average in intelligence, despite his handwriting being way below average.
Yes there are a lot of stupid and ignorant people around. Big deal, intelligence is overrated.
Wisdom and humility is what is really lacking.
Putting everything in at the start allows the a company to prepare the training programs, a whole bunch of documentation and helpdesk scripts much earlier.
Better than waiting for extensions to be created and pass some vetting process - since people might create more than one extension to do very similar things, and of variable quality.
And that's why some stuff is more "Enterprise" friendly, and other stuff isn't.
Lots of people out there don't really care about computers or what an operating system is, they just want to get their jobs done, get $$$ and get on with their lives.
My theory is the male engineers are far less likely to be too busy with girlfriends to suicide bomb themselves.
;).
After all a real girl in hand is worth 72 virgins in some metaphorical bush. Or something like that.
GSM encryption is quite a mess apparently: http://wiki.twit.tv/wiki/Security_Now_213
As for the OPs talk about "open enough so the state can listen to any citizen's conversation", the government can already listen in - they don't need to crack stuff since GSM stuff is already decrypted at the towers.
AFAIK, GSM encryption is only used between the phone and the tower. After that the conversations or messages travel unencrypted through the rest of the network.
> For true realism try Americas Army 3, the slightest bullet wound can leave you slowly bleeding to death.
Do you also get air-dropped off at the wrong spot, and have to walk for hours to the actual battle zone, only to then get killed by your own side's trigger happy pilots?
Yeah. In one of my previous workplaces we wrote stuff for the journalists and passed it to them, and even then a few still got it wrong.
Not talking about "marketing bullshit" being edited - but the hard facts somehow got garbled or changed along the way.