PLMS cheapest sale free pharmacy usually involves flexing the limbs during sleep, typically during periods buy generic no cost professional of non-random eye movement (REM) sleep. One theory is that buy prozac online difficulties with nerve regulation may be an underlying cause, but celebrex buy no studies have come to a firm conclusion. They may purchase metronidazole gel online also take a full medical history and ask about any order order medications the person is taking, their family medical history, and zyprexa sale certain lifestyle factors. They can also help a person determine buy cheap quinine whether or not another condition is causing their sleep condition. buy cialis without prescription The same report indicates that the prefrontal cortex can take discount methotrexate longer than other areas of the brain to become fully sale discount cheapest active after waking. Periodic limb movements disorderPeriodic limb movements disorder discount online review (PLMD) occurs when a person periodically and involuntarily moves their estrace vaginal cream for sale limbs during sleep. Some research also suggests that using amber-tinted t-ject 60 no prescription blue-light-blocking lenses before bed may improve sleep in people with insomnia..

Wikipedia articles now turn up at the top of many Internet searches. They have assumed an astonishing degree of authority in only a few years. And deservedly: They are, in general, remarkably accurate. In an article appearing in Technology Review, Simson Garfinkel argues that the standards and protocols Wikipedia uses are redefining the very notion of truth. As Garfinkel explains,

On Wikipedia, objective truth isn’t all that important, actually. What makes a fact or statement fit for inclusion is that it appeared in some other publication–ideally, one that is in English and is available free online. “The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth,” states Wikipedia’s official policy on the subject.

“Verifiability” means that the information appeared in some other publication. Other principles are “Neutral Point of View” — editing an entry about yourself is a no-no, for example — and “no original research.”

These principles work beautifully given the fact that anyone can edit entries. Vandalism and errors generally get corrected extremely quickly.

But the three principles don’t work perfectly, and Garfinkel gives a couple of thought-provoking examples where they fail dramatically, because information has gained currency through repetition and only the principals are in a position to explain why it is false.

A fascinating piece, and, like everything Garfinkel writes, very well-argued.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 22nd, 2008 at 7:24 am and is filed under Miscellaneous, Social computing, The explosion, The Internet and the Web. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.