dynamic_sausage

Indeed, this is one misleading title. The Soviets were really fond of Steinbeck and especially the Grapes of Wrath (the book) up until the moment he wrote positively of the American troops in Vietnam in the 60s. After that, all his books were pulled from libraries and weren't reissued/published until Perestroika, when 6-volume collected works were released in 1989.

Another approach that does not show up in comments here is to use a reference manager, such as Zotero. It integrates nicely with browsers, so that saving webpages or pdfs is only one click away. Data is stored locally, so if a resource goes offline, you will still have access to it. And it has full-text indexing and search, so you can lookup terms from pages that you previously stored, even if you don't remember the metadata.

Annoying as it may be, this situation is somewhat ubiquitous in the history of human knowledge.

Transistors were invented by Lilienfeld, yet everyone knows about the work of Bardeen et al. at Bell Labs. Einstein in relativity is the Balto of Lorentz-Poincare, which is why his Nobel prize mentioned the photoelectric effect and not relativity.

Simple formulas of scientific credit tend to stick better; the path of scientific progress is usually anything but. This is ok. The main thing is the knowledge itself, not who came up with it after all.

And yet it is very frustrating!

The author seems to be unaware of the large market for travel data esims. Airalo and Ubigi are two examples of user-facing resellers of these, which make buying a physical prepaid sim near obsolete.

I would say that for travel, esim is much better than sim. Given that seamless data roaming is one of the main features of Google Fi, this opinion is not uncommon.

See, this is a really interesting point there: do we separate the speaker and the speech, or do we lump them together?

I.e., if a Hitler (you saw that coming) says something demonstrably true, while a Pope (yep) says something demonstrably false — who do we agree with? Working out an answer to this question in a clear form has repercussions for the cancel culture, institutions created by slave owners, etc, etc, etc. It isn't new either. People struggled with the oeuvre of writers who supported Nazism way back when: do we read them or do we forget them? Knut Hamsun comes to mind. Rolf Nevanlinna would be a similar example in mathematics.

This is a good point. Just like it should be ok to read Kipling for his literary merits, keeping in mind you don't have to agree with his politics.