Who wants to pay premium for prices?

https://youtu.be/hJ9yBgTp9UQ?si=HdQe-Yr5dGItqCuG

Reminds me of The Office when Michael Scott implies he brushes his teeth faster than a guy in a wheel chair lol

It’s from the movie Monster House

It’s like how all the characters in Idiocracy are named after brands

Can pi be expressed with a finite amount of digits in another number system?

I’m confused, how is pi used as a unit? My understanding is that it’s a number

Yes I agree with that. I think there was an issue with establishing what “source” meant in the given context. I wouldn’t say the text of a single wikipedia article is a reliable source by itself, however that doesn’t discredit the reliability of accurate information on Wikipedia in my opinion. If you stripped a textbook of it’s listed citations and credited authors, then you can’t really verify the information in it either.

You’re missing a lot of other points I’ve made. Let me ask you then what is a reliable source of information? You’re skepticism implies nothing is trustworthy if you have to verify information with various sources. Do you only trust what you can observe first hand?

It depends on the website. A Twitter post with no source? Untrustworthy. Wikipedia page with plenty of sources to back up the article? I would default to saying trustworthy, but of course I would still have to check the sources myself. Wikipedia is a tool. It connects you to outside sources of info. It has the reputation of being reliable enough to get trustworthy info in its summaries. As I’ve already stated before, mistakes have been made though.

Wikipedia isn’t a person though. It’s a website of articles that summarizes topics and ideally lists sources that contain the info within it. I agree a person that sounds like that is untrustworthy, but that doesn’t mean anything on the topic of wikipedia.

The first paragraph of the first link they posted says that wikipedia’s reliability has been generally praised over the last 10 years.

Edit: unless you’re saying that wikipedia is so untrustworthy that it is misinformed about being untrustworthy lol

Info on Wikipedia shouldn’t be taken at face value, check the sources given! A lot of the examples you gave likely didn’t have any citation. The blame for misinformation partly lies with the people accepting information with no sources given. Also, any example of known misinformation just means that it has been caught and corrected. Everyone should know wikipedia is not right 100% of the time but it is always getting better. There millions of articles and I don’t think the examples you listed should lead anyone to believe it is overall unreliable. It is good however to not blindly put your trust in whatever you read from it, and if you do come across something that isn’t correct, you have the opportunity to fix it.

It’s definitely not 100% foolproof to misinformation, but I’ve always found wikipedia to be reliable. Why do you feel it isnt?

I don’t know much about it, but supposedly Vikings used mushrooms to induce rage and hysteria before going into battle. It possibly triggered or heightened PTSD.

The article said that the patient was happy to help pave the way for more successful transplants. I at least hope it was cost free on his end since it seems like it was mostly a learning opportunity for the doctors.