What a great example of how accurate Wikipedia is, someone went to extreme lengths to falsify information, they were discovered and their edits reverted, as happens in most cases
As a joke, some of my colleagues created a fake persona for another colleague after obtaining an old picture of him in punk rocker garb from college.
It was a long con, they created a fake band, added references to various obscure pages, etc. ultimately a page was created with the photo posted that followed every Wikipedia policy except for being false.
I’m sure people are doing that professionally. The problem with Wikipedia is that it’s awesome except for when it isn’t.
The weakness of the system is that it depends on arbitrary standards of notability and online reference. Not novel problems but you need to have a different kind of critical eye than other platforms.
Completely fictitious content is bad PR for Wikipedia, but it doesn't really materially affect its usefulness as a reference. Nobody's coming to Wikipedia looking to write their thesis on a band that never existed. The reason fictitious pages like this survive is because nobody is reading them. Even infamous long-lived examples like "Jar'Edo Wens" had essentially no real-world impact.
Well, yes, after ten years, just as in the case of the toaster. And the translations of her Featured Article in three other Wikipedia language versions had STILL not been corrected last time I looked.
Eventually they were discovered and their edits reverted. The misinformation was on the site for years.
This is like Donald Trump now (finally) admitting he lost the 2020 election fair and square and that Biden is the legitimate president of the United States and then using that as an example of what an honest and upstanding democracy-loving bloke he is. Ehh ... no.
No one is actually answering your question, the answer to which is absolutely yes, it’s technically possible to do what you’re describing. Actually getting 51% hash power will be likely infeasible.
Nah, it’s no fun for 999 people to end up with a useless lottery ticket, this way everyone ends up with wall art and a fun story. Much more entertaining than just buying a reproduction, much cheaper than buying an original.
The parent comment didn't mention Bezos. Since the majority of individual wealth created by Amazon is reflected in the price of Amazon stock, then taxing executive salary would have the likely effect of shifting more compensation to stock grants, etc.
I think a pretty good benchmark for "appropriate" is behavior that promotes reasonable discourse instead of reactionary backtracking which. That discourse in Lieu's case did not occur when he was accused of supporting genocide.
But to answer your more general question of who gets to decide "appropriate", that is society as a whole. We, as a society and as a civilization, decide what we find acceptable and objectionable. Right now we have drifted into a territory where a one or two sentence soundbite is considered appropriate to encapsulate complex issues that defy easy solutions despite the soundbite pundits, politicians, and activists that spout them as axiomatic truths, shutting down the ability to have a conversation with anyone who slightly disagrees.
Do you have more insight on this, on how it could be handled better? Or are you happy with the status quo where little conversation but much shouting is the norm?
Of course it is. The apology is intended for damage control to repl.it and his personal reputation, given he has had an hour to digest the winds of HN on both and is clearly concerned by what he sees. Dollars to donuts he remains baffled why such a defense of his reputation and that of his company is even necessary in the first place. You don’t even need to be as cynical as I am to get there. It’s that transparent.
“I guess it’s just because of how I had to be as a struggling kid in Jordan” is the tell. He obviously has no idea why this feedback is happening if that’s his conclusion, so how can he apologize for any of it? He’s still retweeting sympathetic viewpoints on Twitter as we speak, so you can compute the honesty of this apology based on that fact alone.
Read “do better” as “avoid generating compromising receipts wherein I twice trot out lawyers and my ability to pay for them like I’m dramatically unsheathing Anduril, while privately maintaining my view that I’m being ripped off at every turn because someone had the gall to use Docker to build a REPL and I consider that clearly genius architecture to be sensitive intellectual property.” His takeaway going forward is to threaten people in a smarter way, and I’d bet my next paycheck on that.
Honestly, this whole saga is a hell of an invitation to compete against repl.it, in displaying such a severe decision-making and tactical weakness at the executive level.
Would love to see a source to back this number up if you have one. I had caps on almost every ISP I had in Europe, but even out in the boonies here in the US I've only seen caps on one (unfortunate) connection.
