Wikipedia is mirrored by several sites. Additionally, anyone can download the entirety of the site, if they wish.

If the WMF pulled the plug tomorrow, there'd still be mirrors, hardcopy versions (check out the number of published books on Amazon that are nothing but printed Wikipedia articles), the official Wikipedia 1.0 hardcopy version, and numerous partial mirrors that were reconstructed through browser caches.

I'm not worried.

Oh, please. Wikipedia doesn't discriminate against offline sources; in fact, it encourages their use. The problem that you're coming up against is notability. Notability is established by adding sources -- online or offline -- to an article. Completely unsourced articles are essentially useless, because there's no verifiability, only original research. If you want to publish original research, put it on your blog. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; does not publish original research.

Yeah, I saw. Surprising. Even more surprising, he seems quite proud of his accomplishments and fiercely loyal to Gillard/Labor. I don't know what to say. I guess it's easy to criticize from the outside, and minor incremental advances are better than regression... but who can help but be disappointed?

I still don't understand how Peter Garrett could turn into such a "team player" and moderate, after decades of activism. I guess it goes to show how much politicians have to sell out in order to make it to the top levels.

Even as an American, I considered Garrett something of a hero when I was growing up. It was a shock to find out what's become of him today.

That kind of ironic parody might sell to hipsters and postmodernists, but I don't think that would really be enough to recoup your costs. So-called "art video games" are known for doing stuff like this, but I don't know of any examples offhand.

Ever since the early days, there has been a loud minority of people proclaiming that Tiger Direct is run by scammers. This reputation has kept me from ever buying anything from them. If these allegations are true, then maybe Tiger Direct does deserve that reputation.

"Spirit of the law" is more of a liberal thing. Our current court leans a bit to the conservative side, and they tend to be more concerned with "letter of the law". Of course, both sides would probably dispute such simplistic characterizations, but that's pretty much how it works out in practice.

Yeah, I have to admit that it sounds like nothing but a paycheck. Given that the last two Terminator films were pretty forgettable, I'm hoping that they just do a reboot. Wipe everything clean, start with a brand new story, and get a real director (with a real name, not a nickname).

If they do a reboot, they could bring in Arnie in a small role. Make him a military leader responsible for pushing through Skynet, rewarded for his years of service to the country by being the first 3D model used to create a humanoid Terminator. That could work. It would even explain why he's 60-65 years old, yet the Terminator looks half that age. See? It's not hopeless. It's just incredibly unlikely that this will turn into a good film.

Yeah. It's impressive that he's gotten this far, but the credulous, easily-impressed headline (and story) left me similarly annoyed. It's basically some manga nerd remaking the classic 80s graphical adventure games. Instead of calling it what it is, they decided to run it as some kind of revolutionary, radical new approach to video games. The guy himself isn't necessarily responsible for that, though. He has no control over how the media present his story. Sounds like an decent guy with a decent project, but it's not really all that interesting to me. Aren't most indie games made by guys who think their ideas are underrepresented and underappreciated in mainstream gaming?

The United States doesn't really have a left-wing party. There's the Green Party and the Socialist Party, but neither of them is relevant in any meaningful way. I suggest that you vote with the Greens or Socialists, if you're truly interested in left-wing politics, even if they are irrelevant. It may not accomplish much, but you'll be able to sleep better at night. If you're more of a centrist or right winger, then I suggest the Libertarian Party, which are at least supportive of freedom, even if they are free market fundamentalists. I can respect their stance on freedom, at the very least... which is more than I can do for most political parties.

There's also the Social Justice Party, but I don't know much about them. The Greens piss me off every once in a while, with their anti-technology, neo-luddite rhetoric. Social Justice seems like a decent alternative, if you're into progressive, left-wing politics and don't want to go full-on socialist.

Yeah, I actually got kind of excited, too. It was stupid of me to think that they were actually going to change something that matters.

It seems like Mozilla does nothing but try to piss off their old-school users, while ineffectually trying to appeal to Chrome users. Some of their changes have been good, and some have even been great, but the vast majority have just been perplexing.

The director is known for intelligent and creative science fiction films, which kind of puzzles me. Why, if you had that kind of reputation, would you make a film based on an MMORPG? There must either be a huge budget (which would be tempting to work with, after the smaller productions, I suppose) or a very good script. Despite my cynicism, I choose to believe that the script is insightful and well-written. Unfortunately, Wikipedia says the budget is around $220M, which makes my cynicism increasingly difficult to ignore. On the other hand, if they're spending this much money, they're probably going to try to do it right.

Hell, I think voting is kind of pointless, but I was trying to limit myself to just Internet activism.

Regardless, I finally voted again, in 2012, after 20 years of boycotting the voting booth. It felt as pointless as ever, but I got a nice sticker that says I voted.

I agree that it seems that way, at first. However, it seems unlikely to actually affect meaningful change. More likely, it will either be ignored or eliminated. A petition has just as much chance of scaring politicians into changing their behavior, and it doesn't bring about connotations of vigilantism and what I suspect will come to be known as "Internet terrorism".

Signing Internet petitions is only marginally less useless and pointless than harassing government employees. In fact, if I made a list of the most pointless activism on Internet, they would be:

1. Printing form letters and mailing them to Congresspeople
2. Writing e-mails to Congresspeople
3. Signing Internet petitions
4. Complaining loudly on Internet forums
5. Hacking and vandalism
6. Publishing a batshit crazy manifesto
7. DDOSing the government
8. Sending death threats via e-mail

That's in vague order of (comparatively) least pointless to most pointless.