There's nothing in the law that I can find that exempts some special "journalist" class.
Other than the part about making no law infringing on the freedom of the press?
Seriously, the constitution is supposed to trump this kind of legislation. Otherwise, any kind of embarrassing information gets dubbed a "trade secret" and everyone loses.
"Sorry, doctor, the Journal of the American Medical association would love to publish your expose of Vioxx testing, but Merck informs us that the data is their trade secrets, so we're obligated to turn you and the secret data over the the FBI instead."
The MediaWiki philosophy is to try to put all of the automations and human processes within the existing Wiki system as much as possible. There are a bunch of automations which happen behind the scenes, though. E.g., bots send IRC messages about pending administrative tasks, potential vandalism, etc. There have been several proposals for more structured threaded discussions, but those have been resoundingly rejected by the Wiki purists.
Yes I am serious, but you are right, it's not the same thing at all. All the suicide bombers in history put together, even including the 9/11 hijackers don't come close to the death toll of the "collateral damage" in the 2003 U.S. bombing of Iraq, even if you take the low end estimates of 20,000 (the high end estimates are over 100,000.) Any you can't deny that the entire U.S. media, including ostensibly liberal-leaning outlets like NPR and CNN, gave the "shock and awe" campaign far more time, without any criticism at the time (and precious little since) than Al Jezeera has ever given street celebrants after an attack by militant islamists. The cognitive dissonance inherent in your position is just astounding, but I suppose your bird dog loves you anyway.
And your favorite U.S. news outlets -- no matter which they are, because they all did -- went on and one with pictures of "shock" and "awe," both dictionary synonyms of "terror."
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, the constitution is supposed to trump this kind of legislation. Otherwise, any kind of embarrassing information gets dubbed a "trade secret" and everyone loses.
"Sorry, doctor, the Journal of the American Medical association would love to publish your expose of Vioxx testing, but Merck informs us that the data is their trade secrets, so we're obligated to turn you and the secret data over the the FBI instead."
...please: This is the big issue here, that the food conglomerates and pharma industry doesn't want to talk about.
The MediaWiki philosophy is to try to put all of the automations and human processes within the existing Wiki system as much as possible. There are a bunch of automations which happen behind the scenes, though. E.g., bots send IRC messages about pending administrative tasks, potential vandalism, etc. There have been several proposals for more structured threaded discussions, but those have been resoundingly rejected by the Wiki purists.
Yes I am serious, but you are right, it's not the same thing at all. All the suicide bombers in history put together, even including the 9/11 hijackers don't come close to the death toll of the "collateral damage" in the 2003 U.S. bombing of Iraq, even if you take the low end estimates of 20,000 (the high end estimates are over 100,000.) Any you can't deny that the entire U.S. media, including ostensibly liberal-leaning outlets like NPR and CNN, gave the "shock and awe" campaign far more time, without any criticism at the time (and precious little since) than Al Jezeera has ever given street celebrants after an attack by militant islamists. The cognitive dissonance inherent in your position is just astounding, but I suppose your bird dog loves you anyway.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Stanford has a non-free, degree-granting program called Stanford Online, which was designed by Vint Cerf in 1973. Seriously.
I remember when the only internet dot com poster boy was Craig Shergold.
In Soviet Usenet, the viruses unshar and uudecode you!