3 ms·

source?

• saurik 10y ago
  Seriously? In addition to having been fairly big news, and having been covered and talked about on this website numerous times, it took me all of three seconds with a single generic Google search to get a high-profile news result that focusses on the issue. Knee-jerk challenges to source things should be limited to things that are at least slightly difficult to find sources for and which are also difficult to believe. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-complicated-relationship-with-net-neutrality/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25...
  • yellowapple 10y ago
    Not the GP, but while I'd give you credit for the "at least slightly difficult to find sources for" part of that, "difficult to believe" definitely applies (at least for the average person) when it comes to a claim that Wikipedia, of all organizations, acts deliberately to undermine net neutrality. Not that you're wrong, of course; only that asking for a source for such a claim is by no means unreasonable.
  • exception_e 10y ago
    Believe me, I'm the first person to kindly point out that something is "Googlable" or, in the case of programming, direct someone to the docs. With this, I couldn't believe that Wikipedia would engage in such a unethical practice - didn't even search for it considering that Wikipedia is generally a great org. Thanks for the info.