David Gerard vs. the blockchain, an emerging wiki war (opens in new tab)

(wikipediawehaveaproblem.com)

62 pointshoofish9y ago50 comments

50 comments

36 comments · 11 top-level

avmich9y ago· 4 in thread

I've skimmed through Bitcoin article on RationalWiki and phrases like

"The use case of the currency is purchasing illicit goods (e.g., drugs and stolen data on darknet marketsWikipedia's W.svg) and darknet scams (e.g., murder-for-hire)[10][11] and extortion (e.g., "ransomware", for which it is the currency of choice[12]).[13]"

make me doubtful.

petre9y ago

RationalWiki looks pretty much like a troll enterprise disguised as an encyclopedia.

lawless1239y ago

it's handy for dodgy medicine, if you see some weird "Miracle cure" or diet etc Rational Wiki usually already has en explanation with citations as to why it's bullshit woo.

AstralStorm9y ago

Poe's law at work. It is quite a genuine extremist wiki, only a bit of troll.

1 more reply

ue_9y ago

It's worth noting that RationalWiki can be extremely biased on certain topics, to outright unresearched and amateur content on others. I would be careful taking anything from RW (or Wikipedia, but to a lesser extent) at face value.

https://xkcd.com/906/

obstinate9y ago· 4 in thread

The author, or perhaps the author's affiliates, are doing battle with RationalWiki over the right to have PSI research and other nonsense treated as factual on Wikipedia. http://wikipediawehaveaproblem.com/2015/11/how-rational-wiki... Or at least they claim they are. RationalWiki's page seems to suggest that they are not the ones editing Wikipedia to reflect the skeptical viewpoint in this case. This was linked from the article here posted, which is the only reason I know about it. But anyway, it does not do much to inspire confidence.

majewsky9y ago

> PSI research and other nonsense

What is PSI here? The disambiguation page on Wikipedia doesn't suggest a fitting expansation AFAICS.

SideburnsOfDoom9y ago

In context, PSI likely means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psionics

hoofishOP9y ago

That's misinformation. I have nothing to do with PSI, i just focused on two biographies of two individuals who are fringe proponents. I specifically only edited basic biographical meta data. My detractors want to paint me as a fringe promoter so as to discredit my study.

obstinate9y ago

He that lieth with dogs shall rise up with fleas.

All I know about you is that you spent some time working on pseudoscientists' Wikipedia pages, including editing Deepak Chopra's page while being paid by Deepak Chopra, and now have some beef with RationalWiki and Wikipedia. This pattern matches a little too well for me to want to spend time looking into it more deeply. Best of luck.

1 more reply

31h9y ago· 4 in thread

The first sentence asserts that Brendan Eich is the author of Java, which is false.

mikeycgto9y ago

And then I stopped reading.

klez9y ago

So you judge a non-technical article written by a non-technical person on the fact that he doesn't know that two programming language with a very similar name are not the same language?

2 more replies

mirimir9y ago

Right, JavaScript.

hoofishOP9y ago

my bad, javascript. I'll correct it. and yes I know the difference, my platform is programmed in JavaScript.

peteretep9y ago· 4 in thread

Fake rationality warriors on Wikipedia is a real thing. I have briefly made the mistake of participating in various nutrition articles before, and run into them. They seem to make extensive use of sources that don't support their claims, especially paywalled ones, with impressive sounding titles, that end up being glossy magazines with opinion pieces. There's a certain irony seeing science and rationalism defended in non-scientific and non-rational ways, and we should make more of an effort to call it out.

Moshe_Silnorin9y ago

You should read RationalWiki, various pomo terms and theories are written about as if there were anything behind them. The degeneration of the atheist community is making me seriously consider the unpleasant idea that religion serves the vital purpose of filling the "obviously irrational belief over which we bond" whole in our hearts, and we've abandoned it to our perdition.

ue_9y ago

>various pomo terms and theories are written about as if there were anything behind them.

What do you mean? Because I don't think there's anything wrong with post-modern theory; it's a topic that's actively discussed in philosophy. I think it's unwise to dismiss something just because it's post-modern, it it given credence to post-modernism.

Perhaps there is something behind Derrida.

peteretep9y ago

    > that religion serves the vital
    > purpose of [snip]

I mean, the simpler explanation is it -- religion proper and worship of cargo-cult sciencey-sounding stuff -- makes people feel superior to others. Real science and rationality doesn't, but a vague appeal to authority, purity of thought, and being better than others sure does.

pwdisswordfish9y ago

> various pomo terms and theories

Care to be more specific?

davidgerard9y ago· 4 in thread

um, wat.

From my view, this is persistent crank Rome Viharo complaining that someone from RationalWiki (me) is mean yet again.

He seems to have launched the Ethereum bit off this: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_... in which Ethereum advocates are upset that a non-fan edits the article on Ethereum and actually applies the Wikipedia content rules.

but hey, AMA!

davidgerard9y ago

His website name is because he was banned from Wikipedia in 2013 for persistent sockpuppeting. Here's his RW article: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rome_Viharo

hoofishOP9y ago

I wasn't banned from Wikipedia for sock puppeting, you're stating misinformation from RationalWiki.

1 more reply

hoofishOP9y ago

There are many ethereum sub reddits mentioning concern about your presence. Shrugging me off as a "Crank" is not something you can continue to do every time someone criticizes you or RationalWiki.

davidgerard9y ago

Yes, they're upset that I dare edit the Ethereum article according to Wikipedia sourcing rules.

2016: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_dav...

2017: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_...

I tried to be helpful https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_... but advocates are really bad at understanding that Wikipedia isn't a platform for advocacy, much as you are concerning Rupert Sheldrake advocacy.

dk89969y ago· 3 in thread

Looks like its down.

pwdisswordfish9y ago

http://archive.is/rx20S

lern_too_spel9y ago

I read a few paragraphs while it was up. It's just a poorly written hatchet job.

mirimir9y ago

I don't have an opinion re Rome Viharo vs David Gerard.

But I do agree that Wikipedia is a clusterfuck. It seems OK as a source for basic factual stuff. But otherwise, I have no time for it.

1 more reply

MilkyBar9y ago· 2 in thread

Wikipediawehaveaproblem is a harassment site. Rome Viharo got banned from Wikipedia in 2013 and for the past 4 years has been stalking, threatening, doxing, blackmailing and spreading misinformation about those Wikipedia editors he holds responsible for his ban. He never moves on and has an ongoing grudge against those wiki editors. Viharo claims to be the victim of harassment, but if you read his website all he does is attack and smear Wikipedia editors.

MilkyBar9y ago

Viharo has been described as pedoish and a stalker because he's doxed and stalked Wikipedia editors who are far younger than him, including teenagers. He's 50 years old, but his website stalks editors in their teens. Viharo has whole sections on his website following these editors, recording everything about them, even their taste in computer games. Its creepy. He should just move on and stop stalking wikipedians he holds responsible for his ban. Why take Wikipedia so seriously?

MilkyBar9y ago

There's at least 5 sock-puppets of Rome Viharo banned on his Rationalwiki page talk (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rome_Viharo). These accounts were blocked for doxing, personal attacks, (fake) legal threats and impersonation. Concerning the latter check one of the accounts/IPs below where he said he was a "neutral" university/research institute doing an analysis into cyberbullying. Of course no such study exists. So he was even pretending to be others to post; this is deception like his Wikipedia sockpuppetry.

http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&... http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&... http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&...

http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/216.230.2... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/158.58.17... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:FullyInformed

saurik9y ago

Seeing that this is a continuation in a saga of the author and their issues with Wikipedia, and that many of the comments then take a step back to look at the overall goals and discuss the war rather than the battle, it is likely important to look at the previous submission from this website and the conversation that took place.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14483080

TorKlingberg9y ago

Wikipedia articles are often dominated by fans of the subject. When people have financial interest in driving up the value of their favorite coins it gets worse. It's probably good to have some balance. The author talking about "war" and "battle of information" does not exactly give a sense of objectivity either.

dredmorbius9y ago

In my experience, when the targets of criticisms based on facts, history, and rational argument claim that facts, history, and rational argument are unfair, and attack the person rather than the arguments ... the criticisms are probably pretty well-founded.

David Gerard seems to be doing something right, and hitting his mark.

tzs9y ago

The site seems to be having problems at the moment. Here's a Google cache link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PB6s--E...

Here is a text-only cache link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PB6s--E...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

50 comments

36 comments · 11 top-level

avmich9y ago· 4 in thread

I've skimmed through Bitcoin article on RationalWiki and phrases like

make me doubtful.

petre9y ago

RationalWiki looks pretty much like a troll enterprise disguised as an encyclopedia.

lawless1239y ago

it's handy for dodgy medicine, if you see some weird "Miracle cure" or diet etc Rational Wiki usually already has en explanation with citations as to why it's bullshit woo.

AstralStorm9y ago

Poe's law at work. It is quite a genuine extremist wiki, only a bit of troll.

1 more reply

ue_9y ago

https://xkcd.com/906/

obstinate9y ago· 4 in thread

majewsky9y ago

> PSI research and other nonsense

What is PSI here? The disambiguation page on Wikipedia doesn't suggest a fitting expansation AFAICS.

SideburnsOfDoom9y ago

In context, PSI likely means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psionics

hoofishOP9y ago

obstinate9y ago

He that lieth with dogs shall rise up with fleas.

1 more reply

31h9y ago· 4 in thread

The first sentence asserts that Brendan Eich is the author of Java, which is false.

mikeycgto9y ago

And then I stopped reading.

klez9y ago

So you judge a non-technical article written by a non-technical person on the fact that he doesn't know that two programming language with a very similar name are not the same language?

2 more replies

mirimir9y ago

Right, JavaScript.

hoofishOP9y ago

my bad, javascript. I'll correct it. and yes I know the difference, my platform is programmed in JavaScript.

peteretep9y ago· 4 in thread

Moshe_Silnorin9y ago

ue_9y ago

>various pomo terms and theories are written about as if there were anything behind them.

Perhaps there is something behind Derrida.

peteretep9y ago

    > that religion serves the vital
    > purpose of [snip]

pwdisswordfish9y ago

> various pomo terms and theories

Care to be more specific?

davidgerard9y ago· 4 in thread

um, wat.

From my view, this is persistent crank Rome Viharo complaining that someone from RationalWiki (me) is mean yet again.

but hey, AMA!

davidgerard9y ago

His website name is because he was banned from Wikipedia in 2013 for persistent sockpuppeting. Here's his RW article: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rome_Viharo

hoofishOP9y ago

I wasn't banned from Wikipedia for sock puppeting, you're stating misinformation from RationalWiki.

1 more reply

hoofishOP9y ago

There are many ethereum sub reddits mentioning concern about your presence. Shrugging me off as a "Crank" is not something you can continue to do every time someone criticizes you or RationalWiki.

davidgerard9y ago

Yes, they're upset that I dare edit the Ethereum article according to Wikipedia sourcing rules.

2016: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_dav...

2017: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_...

dk89969y ago· 3 in thread

Looks like its down.

pwdisswordfish9y ago

http://archive.is/rx20S

lern_too_spel9y ago

I read a few paragraphs while it was up. It's just a poorly written hatchet job.

mirimir9y ago

I don't have an opinion re Rome Viharo vs David Gerard.