> I did understand the differences. The main issue is that "dangerous" > material may be published anonymously without verification or indeed, any > peer review. > > Keep in mind that you can easily set off people by telling them a UFO > crashed in the centre of New York, and there are actually those that would > believe it. > > Just consider the kind of laymen running blogs and how they react over > anything that stirs the slightest "news".
I am with you on this one. Take a look at the shitstorm in Pakistan over faked wikileaks cables (0), (1) & (2). (0) http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jP2p0uuRX56yc0w9vXP8PRH5t5YA?docId=CNG.ff5b1dec5d31e4c8a507f2ccde331d41.881 (1) http://www.dawn.com/2010/12/17/massaging-public-opinion.html (2) http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article948427.ece _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
