3 ms·
The article doesn't take that tack; the subtitle does. I'd blame the sub-editor (probably also responsible for the [sic] next to the US spelling of pedophile) r
by dtf 17y ago
The article doesn't take that tack; the subtitle does. I'd blame the sub-editor (probably also responsible for the [sic] next to the US spelling of pedophile) rather than the author.
- nzmsv 17y agoThat's true. The article is more of an overview of the stuff online most people aren't aware of. It just seems unfair to dump private intranets along with projects like Freenet and Tor together with RBN botnets, under the "dark web" designation.
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoWhat's wrong with marking a mis-spelling?
- steveklabnik 17y agoIt's not a misspelling in American English. It's like saying "No hablo[sic] espanol[sic]".
- TeHCrAzY 17y agoHowever, as its an UK English newspaper, it's likely appropraite. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic
- steveklabnik 17y agoNo, because the source language isn't in UK English. If it was, then sure.
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoExcept you would say "no hablo espanol" with italics to indicate use of a foreign language (and you'd use the correct accents!). Also how do you know which English variant that copy of the work is in? Emphasising the apparent mis-spelling may also be a way of highlighting that the source material is North American.