Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
1–10 of 282 posts
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#2>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing.
Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#3>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
Now that you mentioned it I can’t unsee it ;-)
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#4>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
I understood it to be searching the page with the Ctrl+F keyboard shortcut.
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#5>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
You have successfully ruined the formerly innocent and inconspicious image of this phrase in my mind.
Have an upvote.
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#6>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
I think Ctrl+F seems to be more popular than 'grepping' these days, although I would very much be in favour of bringing 'grepping' back.
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#7This really connects with the "Cool URIs don't change" mantra.
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#8>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
I think Ctrl+F seems to be more popular than 'grepping' these days, although I would very much be in favour of bringing 'grepping' back.
there's just so few people who still grep through website code directly. :P
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#9>The whole investigation took me 5 minutes. A Web search, a few clicks, and some ctrl+f’ing. Am I the only one who thinks the last phrase sounds weird? I might be used to reading lots of articles that sensor words, but couldn't help reading it as "control-fucking". (Edit: uncensored)
How do I unread your last sentence? Now I want a T-shirt with 'Go away,or I'll CTRL-F you'.
Re: Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
#10Judge me all you want, but I would have clicked on "dirty hippy vibes"...
Honestly, I don't really believe in ubiquitous misinformation being as a large problem as it is made out to be. Everyone arguing for more content regulation had their own motivations or was in some kind of panic.
There will always be people misinformed on the net. Doesn't mean I want a babysitter cleaning everything up, even if I thought they wouldn't just want to suppress dissidents.
I have no facebook account and people say it is really bad there, but I also think major news networks spread bullshit in regular intervals. Doesn't mean everything they report is bullshit, but the normal citizen would be cancelled already.