The history page and the permanent link page are different. The history page shows you all the revisions, which user or IP address did the revision and what it was before. The point is that it is simple to fix a page that was edited erroneously by just looking at the history page.
That's cute that you insinuate that only one side of the political spectrum plays loose with facts when in reality it's a widespread problem across the entire political spectrum. Look at the argument on gun control for instance. People still cite the "Fact" that guns kill x number of people while ignoring that y number of people killed are suicides and that the suicide rate in the US isn't higher than other countries and that y is a very high percentage of x. They'll then take this misleading "fact" and build entire worldviews on it and come up with "solutions" to problems that don't exist while ignoring other actual problems staring them in the face.
They don't beat traditional journalism meaning primary source information from people on the ground actually interviewing people. However, that kind of journalism is dead so really Twitter and Facebook don't need to compete with it any longer. Instead the compete with the kind of news that involves repeating something while adding baseless commentary and opinions ad nauseum.
What you don't realize is that the NSA is about a decade ahead of what the general public can get its hands on regarding surveillance. If you are worried now, you are late to the party.
Left hand navigation pane --> Tools --> Permanent Link. Click that and you will get a link to that specific revision of the page. Here is the permanent link to the entry as of now for the Falcon Heavy Rocket. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind...
> People, generally, are idiots and wikipedia is a reflection of that
Sure, but lots of people aren't idiots and they're the ones writing the wiki.
The idiots are too busy complaining about the wiki on other sites.
This is true. In addition, most of the people who complain about wikipedia don't even know of the existence of the history and talk pages. They don't even understand the very thing they are complaining about. They also probably don't know that you can cite a specific page version so it never changes over time.
So the conservatives who are anti-globalists and aren't accepting of other people...
Hmmm. What other people are you talking about. This seems deceptively broad as a statement. I don't know any conservative who isn't accepting of ANY other people so it must be a specific group you are referring to. Can you stop beating around the bush and tell us which one you were alluding to?
You know, the fallacy of the above post is that it completely ignores the fact that most of the talking points actually were generated by a handful of alternate media types like Dave Rubin, Milo Yiannopoulous, Gavin McGinnes, Steven Crowder, and even Ben Shapiro. Less important but still important were Charlie Kirk, Stefan Molyneux, Ann Coulter, Jack Posobiec, Mark Dice, and Larry Elder.
The amount of logical fallacies here is numerous. For one thing, the person enforcing a rule is different than the person who came up with the rule. If the rule doesn't make sense then that problem is with the team that created the rule, not the department tasked with enforcing the rule. Additionally, the group that enforces the rule needs to be respected because they are part of the chain of command. They are enforcing rules that are created and signed off on at the Colonel and General level. It really is irrelevant if the team enforcing the rules has been in the shit before.
Considering that most social networks and cloud based photo apps can identify who a person is based on a photo, I wonder if an app exists that can help these people by allowing them to discretely take a photo and then tell them it's best guess who the person is if they've tagged them before or if they've been publicly tagged before.
That's what the chain of command is for. The higher level people are supposed to inform the new guys what is and isn't allowed. For one thing, you can't have a phone in Basic. You can't even have an electric shaver in basic. Just keep this mindset going and everything will be fine. Let soldiers have phones kept in their home bases for use when they rotate back there.
Maybe. It could also be confounding. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Or it could just be coincidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Meaning, is human activity, warming, pollution and ocean acidification just all moving in the same direction and therefore appear correlated but only pollution and human activity being causitive and also causing the die-off of coral. I'm saying this having done a research paper on coral die-off and at the time I say the most correlation between die-off and acidification. However, now I'm no so sure.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, thanks to Wikileaks for informing us of that.
The history page and the permanent link page are different. The history page shows you all the revisions, which user or IP address did the revision and what it was before. The point is that it is simple to fix a page that was edited erroneously by just looking at the history page.
That's cute that you insinuate that only one side of the political spectrum plays loose with facts when in reality it's a widespread problem across the entire political spectrum. Look at the argument on gun control for instance. People still cite the "Fact" that guns kill x number of people while ignoring that y number of people killed are suicides and that the suicide rate in the US isn't higher than other countries and that y is a very high percentage of x. They'll then take this misleading "fact" and build entire worldviews on it and come up with "solutions" to problems that don't exist while ignoring other actual problems staring them in the face.
Please provide me a single mainstream media outlet as an example of "Some people...not deliberately trying to mislead (me)".
They don't beat traditional journalism meaning primary source information from people on the ground actually interviewing people. However, that kind of journalism is dead so really Twitter and Facebook don't need to compete with it any longer. Instead the compete with the kind of news that involves repeating something while adding baseless commentary and opinions ad nauseum.
What you don't realize is that the NSA is about a decade ahead of what the general public can get its hands on regarding surveillance. If you are worried now, you are late to the party.
Ignorance is bliss.
Left hand navigation pane --> Tools --> Permanent Link. Click that and you will get a link to that specific revision of the page. Here is the permanent link to the entry as of now for the Falcon Heavy Rocket. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind...
Too bad that the second type of journalism doesn't exist anymore. I weep.
> People, generally, are idiots and wikipedia is a reflection of that
Sure, but lots of people aren't idiots and they're the ones writing the wiki.
The idiots are too busy complaining about the wiki on other sites.
This is true. In addition, most of the people who complain about wikipedia don't even know of the existence of the history and talk pages. They don't even understand the very thing they are complaining about. They also probably don't know that you can cite a specific page version so it never changes over time.
You must be the 1% then. By the way, the amount due on your taxes is only a minimum. Feel free to add on anything else you wish.
So the conservatives who are anti-globalists and aren't accepting of other people...
Hmmm. What other people are you talking about. This seems deceptively broad as a statement. I don't know any conservative who isn't accepting of ANY other people so it must be a specific group you are referring to. Can you stop beating around the bush and tell us which one you were alluding to?
Have you ever seen a graph of a parabola?
Nice post with no facts or sources.
People swayed by me posting an rt.com article are beyond being helped. As the AC posted below, address the argument, not the source.
The Democratic party owns the distinction of being the party of something like 98% of all slave owners so...
I have not seen Ecks Vs. Sever. I need to check it out.
Do you play Watchdogs?
Not all of us are gullible. There is hope.
You know, the fallacy of the above post is that it completely ignores the fact that most of the talking points actually were generated by a handful of alternate media types like Dave Rubin, Milo Yiannopoulous, Gavin McGinnes, Steven Crowder, and even Ben Shapiro. Less important but still important were Charlie Kirk, Stefan Molyneux, Ann Coulter, Jack Posobiec, Mark Dice, and Larry Elder.
You know on MapMyRide, you can choose to not make the GPS for a specific route/ride public. Does Strava not offer this?
The amount of logical fallacies here is numerous. For one thing, the person enforcing a rule is different than the person who came up with the rule. If the rule doesn't make sense then that problem is with the team that created the rule, not the department tasked with enforcing the rule. Additionally, the group that enforces the rule needs to be respected because they are part of the chain of command. They are enforcing rules that are created and signed off on at the Colonel and General level. It really is irrelevant if the team enforcing the rules has been in the shit before.
Considering that most social networks and cloud based photo apps can identify who a person is based on a photo, I wonder if an app exists that can help these people by allowing them to discretely take a photo and then tell them it's best guess who the person is if they've tagged them before or if they've been publicly tagged before.
That's what the chain of command is for. The higher level people are supposed to inform the new guys what is and isn't allowed. For one thing, you can't have a phone in Basic. You can't even have an electric shaver in basic. Just keep this mindset going and everything will be fine. Let soldiers have phones kept in their home bases for use when they rotate back there.
Maybe. It could also be confounding. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Or it could just be coincidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Meaning, is human activity, warming, pollution and ocean acidification just all moving in the same direction and therefore appear correlated but only pollution and human activity being causitive and also causing the die-off of coral. I'm saying this having done a research paper on coral die-off and at the time I say the most correlation between die-off and acidification. However, now I'm no so sure.