Search and Hit Enter

Bernie Sanders DMCA burns Wikipedia

I have a whopping “WTF?” headache this fine Saturday over a Wikipedia report that the Bernie Sanders campaign filed a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) request demanding removal of the Presidential hopeful’s logos. Seriously? From an encyclopedia? If this is the future under so-called Democratic Socialism, run for cover. The Police State pounds the door! He talks the good talk—gentile Uncle promising freedom for all—but I look where he walks, and that’s with a club beating baby seals of free speech. Yikes!

I am decidedly non-partisan, meaning: All politicians are fair game for our bow and arrows to shoot and Bowie knife to gut. (Got a taxidermist on contract to stuff them, too!) The Donald is easy prey, but I never expected Bernie to gloriously trump Trump! The take-down notice’s absurdity outdoes the proposed Wall protecting Americans from Mexicans south and Canadians north. 
Continue Reading

Seriously, Wikipedia?

I would like to wish Wikipedia happy birthday, but wonder what the Hell this photo has to do with free, curated, online information? The pic appears in a blog post self-celebrating the site’s 15th year of operation. What do I miss here? Is the encyclopedia into printing books for distribution to schoolkids? Perhaps use is backhanded commentary, suggesting these tykes would be smarter if only they had access to “free knowledge”.

Maybe the pic is subliminal, instead, and the purest form of propaganda fundraising. To celebrate the birthday, Wikipedia launches an “endowment”, with goal of raising $100 million over 10 years. What’s more stereotypical than using cute kids of color to pull the heart strings to open wallets. For others, donations will be guilt-giving. 
Continue Reading

When Nerds Fight

Encyclopedia Britannica has taken out an advertisement in several major newspapers demanding that magazine Nature retract a December story that showed fairly even accuracy with Wikipedia. The ad appears like a memo, “RE: Demand for Retraction”. Ouch, I guess the normal editorial channels didn’t respond. The memo, uh, advertisement, describes the Nature article as “an affront to the principles of sound scholarship, and we urge Nature to issue a full and public retraction of the article”. From “we urge” is underlined.

Who says there’s no drama in science? 
Continue Reading