Here's what a few of you had to say about some of our recent stories. To post a remark in our feedback forums, enter your comments in the text box at the end of any story (registration required). Additionally, you can jump in on the hottest discussions about our most popular blog posts through the links at the bottom of this page.
Re: The Perfect Human
By Joshua Davis
From: Dave
Your story is not entirely accurate concerning the drunken night, according to an interview of Dean Karnazes. While your version of events is certainly more romantic, it puts the entire article in question.
- - -
Re: The Bush Era Draws to a Close
By Jennifer Granick
From: Ben Ericson
Thank you for a perfect synopsis of how crazy our renegade Republicans ran their flag sideways into what might be considered news. Your opening paragraph and smile have warmed my cold steel paranoid heart, thanks, I've been waiting for a Russian program ssswwwwooooorrrrrdddddssss madddneesss and all, 20 years of owning the Speakers of the House, Gingrich and Hastert – congress-the economy-world trade-judges-vote for either one of our candidates, now almost like a kawallaaa walla washington I'm risking lowering myself from the tree that's been glued to me since global warming and cooling.
- - -
Re: The Bush Era Draws to a Close
By Jennifer Granick
From: Doug
I'm confused about what role you fill at Wired News. It's not that of reporter – you're slinging opinion over facts, and blurring distinctions between arguments. You also seem to be term-deficient, or at least deficient on specifics.
To be specific, you claim that 2006 saw Vice President Dick Cheney call "torture a no-brainer," linking to an article that notes that Cheney does not in fact support that word, does support waterboarding, and does not consider waterboarding to be torture.
Now no matter how much you may want to be able to do this, it's not legitimate to claim that the definition that you feel is the better one is the only one, nor to blur the real story. The real truth is that Cheney supports a technique that some – but not all – consider torture, and that the differences in definitions are what have constituted the primary source of conflict that makes this newsworthy.
I've spoken to many people who feel similarly: Who, when waterboarding is described to them, fully support its use and don't see anything of torture about it, while at the same time decrying pulling fingernails out with pliers, for example, as a clear act of torture. While the line between the just-cited example is clear (mental anguish and fear of harm/danger versus actual physical harm and/or danger), I feel (based on your past demonstrated tendencies) that I must caution you against conflating this into a more general statement or pattern – it's just an example, and as you ought to have been taught, it only takes a single plausible counterexample to disprove a global hypothesis.
It's probably fun to bash, but Wired and its readership might better be served by reading pieces from someone who is paid to think things through a bit more. Or maybe I'm misjudging both.
- - -
Re: Very Short Stories
By Wired magazine editors
From: Ruth Z Deming
Just wrote this:
"W" reigns: Jesus please save us!
- - -
Re: Your Magazine
From: John McCall
I am just an average guy trying to do a little bit better. Trying to do my part. I recycle now. I try not to drive so much. Our new car is smaller and more efficient even though the wife and I would like to have the huge SUV. We replaced the regular light bulbs with energy-efficient fluorescents. And we are continuing to try and do more, anywhere we can.
All of these things I read about in your magazine along with other places. And everyone says that if you want to make a difference you need to make your voice heard. Well, here I am saying it to you: Why can't I get a digital version of your magazine? You make money either way. And the environmental benefits are obvious.
So what's the holdup? This is such a simple thing. It might not change the world and solve all the problems but it won't hurt, either. Or couldn't your lawyers and their lawyers work out an agreement? Or is it that the owner of the publishing company is invested heavily in trees or some other dumb reason like that? Many of those same dumb reasons having gotten us into the situation we are in now anyway. But I guess in the end no one listens to just an average guy. That is unless all the average guys start buying the same thing at once.
- - -
Re: 2006 Foot-in-Mouth Awards
By Tony Long
From: Keir Mussen
I've seen Google's motto quoted incorrectly in just about every article on the subject and I'm tired of it, particularly when the magazine in question is supposed to be an expert source on tech. Google's motto is not "Do no evil." It is "Don't be evil," and there is a big difference there. (Source: Google Code of Conduct.)
I personally don't agree with Google's decision to go into China, but the correct motto does allow the company the wiggle room to do it without breaking its own rules. In theory, if Google does more good than evil, then it is being good. Your way, it could never commit a single evil deed without failing its mission entirely. I don't expect that from a human being, let alone a corporation.
- - -
Sharing is caring. So show us how much you care. Let us know what you think on some of our most popular blog posts:
Gear Factor: How Apple Could Change the Phone Business
Comments: 49
Game|Life: Bunnies Can't Stand Christmas
Comments: 34
Monkey Bites: Microsoft Tries to Patent RSS
Comments: 21
Monkey Bites: Cascading Stylesheets Turn 10
Comments: 20
Table of Malcontents: Underrated SF Classic: Linda Nagata's Tech Heaven
Comments: 17
