| ▲ | jalapenod 6 days ago |
| [flagged] |
|
| ▲ | rimunroe 6 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Much of Wikipedia is pop culture, I wouldn’t call that knowledge. Why? |
|
| ▲ | bilekas 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Leaving out that your comment is opinionated and objectively wrong, pop culture is also knowledge. |
|
| ▲ | MitPitt 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| All culture was once pop |
| |
|
| ▲ | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's handy to have a neutral place I can look up books or passages of the Christian Bible so that I have a reference point when talking to people about it |
| |
|
| ▲ | LtWorf 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Honestly it's the first place I look when I must implement some network protocol. |
| |
| ▲ | freedomben 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Network protocol stuff on Wikipedia has been top notch and my go-to since at least 2010. It really is highly underrated for that. I had to implement a layer 7 protocol on top of UDP back in the day, and it required a lot of understanding/fiddling with UDP and IP packet details to get it working right, and even required some router config (IP fragmentation became a huge problem, gotta love protocols designed by committee D-:) | |
| ▲ | jowea 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yeah, lots of the weaker parts of Wikipedia relate either to political controversy or things that the editor base doesn't care as much about. | |
| ▲ | mschuster91 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | yup. the amount of times I have looked up how to send an email over raw SMTP for troubleshooting... | | |
| ▲ | mdp2021 6 days ago | parent [-] | | ...And on the contrary, I got deliria from an LLM in a similar area just hours ago. This probably highlights how human contribution or automated referencing both have a root in the sources, that should be recovered as a focus. Part of the future of the presentation of information should be hyperlinking "to the book pages". |
|
|
|
| ▲ | UtopiaPunk 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [citation needed] |