Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I think that's just meant to be a footnote.


sort by: page size:

It's in the footnote.

It was simply a footnote.

That's an interesting footnote annotation.

footnote

That does make it a lot better, but at the same time makes the footnote even more of a deliberate statement that could have been left out.

Footnotes.

Why does he have all these footnotes that aren't actually in the article?

Read the footnote.

Yes, it is one of the first footnotes.

Read the last footnote

yep, he vaguely mentions this in footnote 6

Yes, it is further butchered in a footnote.

There are a few mentioned in the footnotes.

It's the footnotes which complete it...

See the footnotes.

So...just going to skip the part about actually reading the footnotes? I just want to be clear on whether to consider you to be someone who has taken the time to inform themselves about the matter.

I read some of the pages before and after that footnote. Highly disturbing, to say the least.

Where did the footnotes go?

I don't see a note on that page. What did it say?
next

Legal | privacy