Wikipedia and the Khan academy are my two best examples for the potential of the internet. Each is an incredible feat that took a simple vision and took it far beyond what I ever thought possible.
Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
91–100 of 496 posts
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#92[flagged]
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
The zeroeth law of Wikipedia – The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work.
Clever. I had to read that repeatedly to get it. Cf: The difference between theory and practice is: "Practice works, in theory."
I heard it as "in theory, theory and practice are the same"
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People have their pet causes People are paid whole-ass salaries to edit Wikipedia (and to become mods on Reddit.) They masquerade as (a dozen different) obsessed weirdos, but they are just normal middle-class people who are being paid to lie.
I'd love some examples of specific pages.
The "Philip Cross" controversy is relevant here, I think:
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is farcical. Supposing you are right and that there was "no doxxing involved", it's still impossible for an outsider like most of us here, to verify it. Especially if there is such a thing as non-public discourse of any kind. It is not a transparent organization, and it does not even pay lip service to the effort of transparency. It is large enough of an organization that it is an absurd claim, on its fa…
When I said anyone can verify it, I meant it; go make an account on wikipediocracy, go to the "Wikimedian Folks Too Embarrassing for Public Viewing" forums, and go through the posts by that user. Quite to the contrary, it's a very transparent organization because edit histories are public. It would be trivial to link to any instances of doxxing on the project, unless they don't exist, which they don't. Wikipediocracy…
[deleted]
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Larry Sanger literally does not understand what the concept of bias is. He has said: "you aligned yourself with one side, against another side, in a debate. That makes you biased, not neutral."
He's so unable to engage with ideas he doesn't agree with that he's conflated having a stance with "bias".
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#97Says an article with a paywall.
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#98Wikipedia has plenty of propaganda. It's often at the fringes of knowledge, in niche subjects where there isn't yet an established group of proponents and detractors. It can be quite subtle too, will fool most laypeople, even those who are otherwise intellectually savvy. It's only when a subject becomes popular that the propaganda gets recognized and rectified.
And? Share an example. This reads like conspiratorial thinking without any evidence.
Not the OP but I'll back him up, and I'll edit this comment when I come across them. They're pretty common. If the domain of knowledge is niche and the page is absolutely huge, that's a good sign to start looking for editoralizations and slants.
A lot of wiki pages about smaller companies only list the good things (fundraising, tech, etc.) and omit any controversies. The deliberate omissions due to bias are even more insidious than weasel words or other forms of poor journalism.
Fwiw I truly believe in Wikipedia and donate every year, but calling it "perfect" would be extremely dangerous (and false!)
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#99> Wikipedia is the largest compendium of human knowledge ever assembled, with more than 7 million articles in its English version, the largest and most developed of 343 language projects. but: > The collections of the Library of Congress include more than 32 million catalogued books and other print materials in 470 languages; more than 61 million manuscripts; the largest rare book collection in North America ... http…
From Merriam Webster:
COMPENDIUM Brief summary of a larger work or of a field of knowledge : abstract
The library is more extensive, but they don't have the same goals. I'd even argue that part of Wikipedia's quality is it's ability to remain small relative to the knowledge it summarises.
Re: Wikipedia survives while the rest of the internet breaks
#100[flagged]
What’s “indoslop” mean? Is it supposed to be a combination of indolent and sloppy? I guess that does describe a lot of the Internet.