Now they can go to the actual private sector to engineer and manufacture things that actually make our lives better.

Let the editors of the article sort it out. That was the whole wiki thing.

Theoretically, but in practice it results in tribalism as papers will be "interpreted" by current experts and propaganda as journalists tell the plebs how to think about the findings.

They require now secondary sources and a research paper is primary:

Articles should rely on secondary sources whenever possible. For example, a paper reviewing existing research, a review article, monograph, or textbook is often better than a primary research paper. When relying on primary sources, extreme caution is advised. Wikipedians should never interpret the content of primary sources for themselves (see Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view).

I can't grab and pull the document like I could when I first opened a PDF with Adobe Acrobat Reader in like 1997. Since 16:9 is the final evolution of display ratios, display the document in either a new window with zero window header or get rid of window header in the tab with the document as the FF window header uses >10% of available vertical screen space which really matters with 8-1/2"x11" documents, which is pretty much all of the PDFs I download. Among the first things I do on a new install is configure FF to default download PDFs so I don't have to deal with their lame college freshman's PDF reader "app". I hope they don't break that configuration option with this update.

Nowhere in there was anything actually showing any incorrect math.

I find eBay more reliable than Amazon. Amazon attempts to obscure who I'm buying from, while eBay features who I buying from.

The way we can tell that this slashdot post is a PR agency product is the information is presented as de facto, as if stating something is not correct makes it not correct. The only predictable result from this is to make the supporters of these things believe even more strongly and the people who don't believe to think those people just stupid naves, with the ultimate and predictable result being derision.

I'm wondering if they do like they did back in the P2P days of taking down batches of sites, with legit sites buried in the lists, never to come back again.

I miss the good ol' days when just the bias of the admin and mods was the issue, not some behind-the-scenes state and corporate PR asshats.

So... of all the things they can't afford, daycare isn't among them? Why is it that if one brings up the cost of daycare as it relates to school attendance, the notion is either ignored, ridiculed, or laughed at?

We can see that without the benefit of free daycare, they rapidly fade into the past.

I suspect it will skew towards people infected as people showing symptoms who couldn't get tested want to know if they had it.

But at least someone is working on it.