3 ms·

Here's the letter: http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/11/16/magazine/16Lede2/mag-16Lede-t_CA0-superJumbo.jpg http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/11/16/magazine

• Curmudgel 12y ago
  If you read that document carefully, you can see that the EFF edited one of passages that they quoted and did not mention their edit, which is a big no-no. The original letter says: (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significant. which the EFF quoted as (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significance).
  • dllthomas 12y ago
    I expect that was accidental, but I agree it should be fixed (either corrected in brackets, or the original with a [sic]).