Wikipedia has enough problems with petty nazi protectionist idiots already.

But, also, it's just not the wiki way to allow edits to be controlled by someone else.

That's an excellent point. I'm in the UK. I would say that I didn't grow up in a religious home.

The apple was just a tasty apple.

He neatly demonstrates some of the problems that WP has - VestedContributor[1] and trusted reputation and a bunch of people circlejerking.

But, really, his damage is a minor problem that can be fixed with existing WP policies - check the fucking sources when you're promoting an article to good or whatever status.

What's worse is the way that WP deals with a slew of new users. Anon users (despite making most of the good edits on the site) are treated like shit. Registering a username is tricky with conflicting rules. Once you find you've broken a rule can very quickly find it escalating into a bunch of different warnings and blocks and harassment.

And don't get me started on the kids running around with auto-tools (twinkle, huggle, rollback, etc) making very rapid, but bad, decisions about other people's edits.

This is a more serious problem, and it's something that WP is only half-heartedly tackling.

I climbed up some book shelves. They were attached to the wall using regular T-slot brackets. I wanted to get to the top shelf because that's where the chocolates were kept.

The shelves collapsed, and I fell, surrounded by books. I was saying, apparently, "Oh dear! Oh dear!".

I was 3.

I can also remember a vivid dream I had of a snake going over my pillow, and an apple. I was upset when I woke that there was no apple there. That was also when I was 3.

Yes! It's that sharp intake of breath "ooh, god, that's harsh. But fair."

EDIT: The UK Amazon product reviews are pretty good.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1466938897

I really hate books like this.

It's quite a confusing site to use, even for people who are familiar with HackerNews or Reddit or Amuzor or etc.

Some people with dementia illnesses have very troubling behaviours - violence, anger, disinhibition (they'll strip naked in the street, for example).

Whether that means they need to be in prison or a secure hospital is another matter, but not all people could be returned to society.

That article is weird. People with mental health problems are far more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators of violence.

It says "Acute psychosis is linked with an increased risk of violence, which is at least doubled in schizophrenia compared to that seen in normal people " - well, use of the word "normal" there is pretty offensive, and there's no indication of the actual risk. If 1 in 10,000 "normal" people are at risk of violence then doubling that takes us to 2 in 10,000 people with psychotic illness at risk of violence. Pretty good odds.

What the US needs is much better medical treatment for people with mental health problems. This means early intervention; crisis and home treatment teams; teams for seldom heard and hard to engage people; etc. These are expensive. But dealing with the fallout of non-productive mad people is a lot more expensive.

> There is no guarantee in life that you will be handed success just because you showed some initial potential.

That's what he wanted to be told hen he was young. Saying "Well done, you're very clever" is less helpful than saying "Well done, you worked hard for that. Keep working hard!" is better. When someone gets 85% but isn't working you can then say "Well done, but you can do better. You can work harder. You can be not just good, but great!".