Gwern Branwen <gwern0(a)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/