ChiefNode

When bugs aren't so shallow

Open source is touted as better, often for one particular reason: everyone sees the information and "fixes it." But what if the knowledge is so obscure, or so advanced, that peer review can do no good -- or, can do harm? Or what if anonymous "helping" actually hurts -- someone has a grudge, or is playing a prank, or just is wrong?

John Seigenthaler Sr. is unhappy with wikipedia for this reason. More reasons to be aware of what you read, see, hear, in open source -- because it can be great, but it doesn't have to be. It's all in how the information is presented, and if you have the access to it you need. . .

posted by Dana Bostrom @ 12:40