And here it is Saturday again, and once again someone on the internet is wrong.
Browsing Habr in my spare time, I stumbled on a note about the case of some Zhukov. The story is murky; as I understood from the discussions, the dude wrote a little accounting app, took money for installing it on users’ computers, and a year later that app started printing accounting reports with something missing from them. That was how the author motivated users to pay him more money. Well, since accounting reports are not your little term paper, the whole thing turned against the author. Now there is a trial, during which everything is shaping up not in his favor.
As always, the “completely innocent” raised a howl to the heavens on the little internet. After all, it is well known that the internet is the abode of democracy and justice. The people will always put their chests forward in defense of Truth. The post itself is not interesting, but the links very much are.
Since when did a Wikipedia article start being called “expert opinion”? First, Wikipedia has never been and never will be a site that provides authoritative legal advice. And second, when I checked the edit statistics it turned out that all these “experts” are anonymous users, most likely one and the same person.
I can already sit here and see how, in the future, people will be posting links like this:
Expert opinion: http://linux.org.ru/Дело_Жукова
Or even like this:
Expert opinion: http://lurkmore.ru/Дело_Жукова
P. S. The article itself has been nominated for deletion. Most likely it will be deleted in the end.