Women in Technology

Article:		OpenWRT 101
Subject:		Errors, errors, errors
Date:		2007-06-07 11:07:06
From:		pnaulls
I haven't read the entire article, but even the first few paragraphs contain many factual errors. , and I couldn't bear to continue. It gets the history and parentage of OpenWRT (sic) wrong, doesn't bother to explain what "bricking" is, makes mention of a mythical "WRT kernel", and claims that Kamikaze is experimental (it was released just last week, and the article is dated after that), to name but a few of the errors. All in all, don't take this seriously.

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.

• Errors, errors, errors
  2007-06-08 02:50:15  mdubrowski [View]
  
  
  How constructive this remark is. Can't you add links to the real stuff then? Or better, warn the writer about the errors, so he can correct ?
• Errors, errors, errors
  2007-06-08 10:58:39  pnaulls [View]
  
  
  "How constructive this remark is."
  
  Indeed, it is, thanks.
  
  "warn the writer about the errors, so he can correct?"
  
  I thought I did - with these comments. I'm hardly in a position to correct them _before_ he publishes, am I?
  
  If I were to correct all the errors in the article, it would take a long long time, and be substantial. It's not worth my time - there's already far better and far more accurate information on OpenWrt - on its Wiki.
  
  If it were only a couple of minor errors, it would be different. But you cannot excuse these glaring errors by saying it's "not constructive".