| General > General Technical Chat |
| The uBeam FAQ |
| << < (381/396) > >> |
| Cerebus:
Thanks for that. I was on the verge of calling out Wilfred myself, but you've done a more thorough and patient job than I would have. It was quite clear from what had passed before that l0rd_hex had properly researched and sourced his Wikipedia edit. That edit appears to reflect facts quite accurately as far as one can tell, while the existing Wikipedia article, taken as a whole, clearly misrepresents Perry and reads like a "puff piece". Thus Wilfred's implicit claim that it was unsourced was unjustified, and his rather strange attack on the poster's character based on the poster's post footer (which makes no claims to being a properly sourced factual quote, and from context one can assume is probably mean to be humorous and, as I believe is the case here, those often misquote for effect) I think counts as a deliberate ad hominem attack. Which tactic he them goes on to decry you for making despite the fact that you aren't, you're just balancing on that line between being direct and rude - which anyone who's paid any attention to you on here knows is your want. Wilfred, if you think you're "fighting the good fight" here you aren't. Perry's machinations are well documented and having her own Wikipedia page lauding her achievements without also documenting a history of activities that border on, possibly are outright, fraud, and most definitely culminate in failure, is wrong. l0rd_hex's efforts to navigate the labyrinth that is Wikipedia's policies and editing practices to set that right should be applauded, not attacked. I'd have helped, but figuring out how to "get things" done on Wikipedia has defeated me in the past so I can only say that l0rd_hex is a better man than me in this regard. |
| cgroen:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on December 16, 2020, 11:48:08 pm ---Every time I see the uBeam thread pop up again I think "have they finally gone under?" --- End quote --- Wishful thinking... |
| Cerebus:
--- Quote from: cgroen on December 17, 2020, 04:24:37 pm --- --- Quote from: EEVblog on December 16, 2020, 11:48:08 pm ---Every time I see the uBeam thread pop up again I think "have they finally gone under?" --- End quote --- Wishful thinking... --- End quote --- The zombie life of uBeam has become an interesting phenomenon in itself. It's dead, we can all see that, it's got no product, no worthwhile property (intellectual or otherwise), no income, but it's still alive, for some value of alive. It's been, what, six years odd that it's been around (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) and still someone, somewhere, has kept on providing the funding to keep it alive. Why is it still getting funding, why hasn't it died yet, and where can I find someone like that to fund any of my pet "blue sky" projects which are still more likely to at least produce a working product at the end of the day than uBeam because I'm starting from the premise that I can't fool the laws of physics? Edit: 8 years, since 2012!!!! |
| jrs45:
Absolute insanity that anyone could characterize the legitimate criticism of a charlatan as "hate speech". And Wikipedia falls for it? Maybe we should cite some of the hate speech of hers, such as that awful crack about "autist" engineers that dared question her (now debunked) claims. |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: Cerebus on December 17, 2020, 04:58:09 pm ---The zombie life of uBeam has become an interesting phenomenon in itself. --- End quote --- The zombie life of many companies are an interesting phenomenon. There are many companies that appeared to have died years ago, whose sad remains are actually still being dragged through legal proceedings, keeping the mortgages of lawyers and accountants paid. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |