Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Caveat Emptor (Score 1) 186

by mveloso (#49485847) Attached to: How Many Hoaxes Are On Wikipedia? No One Knows

With wikipedia, you get what you pay for.

What good is a source of truth if it's not accurate?

Wikipedia was not meant as an existential discussion on the meaning of truth; it was meant as a crowdsourced source of truth. What details do you consider important or unimportant? Why would one detail be not worth correcting?

The last thing I read about faking information on wikipedia was some life detail about an author - that even her relatives believed! It wasn't important, except that it was.

If Wikipedia cared, it would put this banner across the top instead of their fundraising banner: "The information presented may or may not be accurate. All the information here should be verified by other sources before used."

Comment: Re:ASCAP and BMI (Score 5, Insightful) 218

by mveloso (#49467861) Attached to: Legislation Would Force Radio Stations To Pay Royalties

Those are licenses, not royalties. If you want an example of how to make licensing so complicated that it's incomprehensible, read up on music licensing and royalties. Licensing to ASCAP/BMI is not a royalty - it's a license. I would think that BMI/ASCAP would pay royalties as part of the license fee, but it sounds like they don't.

Someone needs to come out with a diagram of how, what, and who gets paid in the music business.

Comment: Iran, friend to none? (Score 1, Interesting) 383

by mveloso (#49399857) Attached to: Why the Framework Nuclear Agreement With Iran Is Good For Both Sides

"no other nation has a right to tell them what to do."

Nobody is telling Iran what to do. Iran has violated multiple agreements, agreements that it signed. That said, I'm not sure why the Obama administration believes they will honor this agreement. Fifth time is a charm?

A rolling disk gathers no MOS.