Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
inherently | unstable source such as Wikipedia can undermine the foundation not only | of the judicial opinion in which Wikipedia is cited, but of the future | briefs and judicial opinions which in turn use that judicial opinion as | authority". `----
Oy! As if we didn't have a nice system to link to specific revisions - which is more than most websites can claim - and don't mention it *all the time*.
Yeah, given that it has reasonably obvious citation and perm-link tools, the inherently unstable is just naive and not related to quality or reliability. There's no shortage of books or magazines providing a stable source of crap. Maybe the guy is thinking more along a technical risk, such as the storage system being compromised and modified.
~~Pro-Lick http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (now a Wikia supported site)
--spam may follow--
____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/