Comments on: What would I do without my Wiki?

By: Don Carlos

Don Carlos — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:38:45 +0000

At this point, I am opposed to any legislation that increases the power of the DOJ.

By: vanderleun

vanderleun — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:38:07 +0000

File under: “I can quit anytime I like.”

“It doesn’t rule my life.”

By: rickl

rickl — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:36:29 +0000

The Oatmeal is also participating in the blackout. Sort of. /hat tip Transterrestrial Musings

By: Neocon Hippie

Neocon Hippie — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:27:46 +0000

I remember a few of the 90’s search engines: Altavista, Excite, Webcrawler.

By: momo

momo — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:08:20 +0000

I use AdBlock et al and was disappointed that I saw absolutely no difference between normal Wiki and blocked Wiki.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:53:34 +0000

The Left endlessly complains about Wall Street sucking up money. But have they ever mentioned how much the Records and Music companies with their copyrights and Hollywood’s “movie licenses” are hording by using government legislation to put down people “pirating” stuff that can’t be pirated to begin with?

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:51:09 +0000

Google cache also has wiki sites up.

Btw, this is basically the soft Leftists finding out that the hard Leftists they voted into power were actually serious. And that business and government can indeed combine without being fascism: they just call it social justice and redistribution.

I said around 2008 that the Left were going to have to regulate the internet if they wanted to maintain their propaganda dominance. Engineered crisis economically. Engineered crisis militarily. Now he’s got time for the rest of you all.

By: ziontruth

ziontruth — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:33:08 +0000

foxmarks,

So that’s why I didn’t notice it–I browse without Javascript unless absolutely necessary (e.g. for posting comments on FrontPage Mag–can’t with Javascript disabled).

On the plus side, Wikipedia lays bare the bias-prone process of truth-finding that in mainstream publications is usually concealed (so you have to dig deep to find the catches in the text). On the minus side, the buildup of cliques means Wikipedia is not a resource “anyone can edit” even if the page in question isn’t write-protected. Wikipedia easily degrades to be under the thrall of majority rule without checks and balances, a tyranny of admins voting among themselves, with dissent crushed under legislation such as the Three-Revert Rule (revert a change three times against the clique and you’re banned). The majorities, of course, tend to be the same people with so much time and so little talent on their hands as have dominated the mainstream media–hard leftists.

Wikipedia is no alternative to the mainstream. It’s just more handy than the mainstream, but it’s largely run by the same gaggle of agitators and pushers of nefarious agendas.

By: Commenter formerly known as roc scssrs

Commenter formerly known as roc scssrs — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:45:54 +0000

Great example of supply-side economics. A growing, creative economy produces things you didn’t know you needed.

By: Artfldgr

Artfldgr — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:37:53 +0000

This blog would have to go if the new laws succeed… if you dont think so, then you havent followed bloggers on the ‘right’ who have had constant problems editing and working on their blogs the more popular they were.

you would be amazed at the whatfors in closing sites now… ultimately, it will be forced to be like soviet news and fascist licensing… only official news people can write, or official bathroom sweeps can sweep, and so on. a modern ancient Japanese feudal state where we lose our names for being the same and we become the jobs we are assigned.

and we are so close to finalizing all this, its truly scary to those that realize the wall they are leaning on, is not a wall, but the side of a beast to big for them to get their mind around