| Beg | This user knows whatbegging the question means, and uses this phrase correctly. |
| Please leave me a messageby email, which I check every day and respond to regularly. If you do not wish to interact by email, then you mayleave a message here. This page shows up in myrelated changes, which I check on a sporadic basis. I do not maintain a watchlist. I typically operate an alternate accountSlawekb (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) because my name is long and the diacritics are not always available. If you can help it though, please don't call me "Slawek" or "Slawekb". I prefer "Sławomir" (pronounced "Swav-o-meer"), although "Slawomir" (without the diacritic) is also acceptable. If you prefer a handle, "SB" is fine as well. It seems like a perennial question why I do not just use one account for all edits, and why I use two different signatures. I use two different accounts on a regular basis becausebusybodyadministrators, having apparently nothing better to do with their time than persecute innocent productive editors, have told me that it is less confusing for them if I use two different accounts to edit rather than just one. I have endeavoured to minimize their confusion by using two different signatures as well. Do not ask me to understand the wishes of our benevolent overlords. I am merely carrying out their mysterious wishes. |
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, edit. Those who can't edit,administrate.
— Wikipedia, in a nutshell
| |||||||||||||||||||
|
In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
— How Facts Backfire,Boston Globe, 11 July 2010
In a practical, immediate way, one sees the limits of the so-called “extended mind” clearly in the mob-made Wikipedia, the perfect product of that new vast, supersized cognition: when there’s easy agreement, it’s fine, and when there’s widespread disagreement on values or facts, as with, say, the origins of capitalism, it’s fine, too; you get both sides. The trouble comes when one side is right and the other side is wrong and doesn’t know it. The Shakespeare authorship page and the Shroud of Turin page are scenes of constant conflict and are packed with unreliable information... Our trouble is not the over-all absence of smartness but the intractable power of pure stupidity, and no machine, or mind, seems extended enough to cure that.
— Adam Gopnik,"How the Internet gets inside us";New Yorker, 14 February 2011
Category:Category of all categories that do not contain themselves
