After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
this bit o' wisdom:
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> Is that all you read in your newspaper? The headlines?
> I rarely read the paper these days. This past Sunday we picked up a copy of
> the paper but otherwise it's been at least a year. I can get more up to date
> news from multiple sources on the web. Why would I want to read what the
> news was at midnight the day before on some dead trees?
We get the paper, but all I read is Dilbert and the Sunday ads.
> But back to the point... I don't only read headlines but when I do read the
> headline it's supposed to accurately represent what the article actually
> says. If there's an article with the headline 'Scientists discover life on
> Mars' then dammit... that better be the jist of the article. It's simply a
> lie if the article is nothing more than 'Researchers think there's a
> possibility that life once existed on Mars.'
So you think Roy is a National Enquirer?
(Anyway, I think Roy can always improve what he does. Better to have no
news than fake news and a sensational headline. I tend to agree with his
leanings, though -- I don't trust Microsoft much anymore. In fact, if you
read Lawrence Lessig the whole consumer computing industry, including the
internet, is rapidly coming under complete business control.)
Uncertain fortune is thoroughly mastered by the equity of the calculation.
-- Blaise Pascal