| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"Robert Cohen" |
| Date: |
16 Dec 2007 08:20:21 PM |
| Object: |
WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article3054287.ece
My impression: There is more than one dictionary publisher and more
than one encyclopedia publisher, so I consider what Google proposes
as neither unfair nor monopolistic.
I suppose that I'll be utilizing em both; though if google's ads
become too annoying... byuh-bye
Speaking of annoying:
Google oughta delete or sumthin re excessive repetitive, reiterative
spammy cross postings.
To the person posting: Everybody has angry opinions to express, well,
at least i do.
It would help your argument not to overly-annoy neutral readers (me),
while stating your case as clearly and fully as you can.
There are surely millions of people who have been unfairly hassled by
a big brother (govt authority) or corporation (telephone sales pests)
and they may also try (admittedly) expensive lawsuits.
There is probably a civil liberties or human rights organization et
cetera that would consider helping your case if its presented
appropriately.
Alan Shorr, an attorney in Wm Shattner's and Candy Bergen's law
firm....uh....nevermind.
.
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
16 Dec 2007 10:39:25 PM |
|
|
On Dec 16, 6:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
It should be intersesting to see which standard becomes more popular
and if the other competitor changes their format to the others.
Where Wikipedia promotes collaboration between authors, knol looks set
to foster rivalry. Contributors to knol will not be able to contribute
anonymously and will not be able to edit each other's work, two
defining characteristics of Wikipedia. Whereas on Wikipedia, readers
find only one entry on, say, the First World War, on knol authors will
submit separate pieces that will compete for advertising dollars.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article3054287.ece
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/msg/acc8bc37610bc203
.
|
|
|
| User: "bernardZ" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
17 Dec 2007 02:54:53 AM |
|
|
In article <cdd2940a-6319-44d6-89ff-bdf1ac251593
@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
On Dec 16, 6:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
It should be intersesting to see which standard becomes more popular
and if the other competitor changes their format to the others.
Where Wikipedia promotes collaboration between authors, knol looks set
to foster rivalry. Contributors to knol will not be able to contribute
anonymously and will not be able to edit each other's work, two
defining characteristics of Wikipedia. Whereas on Wikipedia, readers
find only one entry on, say, the First World War, on knol authors will
submit separate pieces that will compete for advertising dollars.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article3054287.ece
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/msg/acc8bc37610bc203
Unless they do some background checks which I doubt, the authors on knol
will be as anonymous as the ones on the Wikipedia
.
|
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
18 Dec 2007 12:30:44 AM |
|
|
On Dec 17, 12:54 am, bernardZ <Berna...@nospam.com> wrote:
In article <cdd2940a-6319-44d6-89ff-bdf1ac251593
@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
On Dec 16, 6:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
It should be intersesting to see which standard becomes more popular
and if the other competitor changes their format to the others.
Where Wikipedia promotes collaboration between authors, knol looks set
to foster rivalry. Contributors to knol will not be able to contribute
anonymously and will not be able to edit each other's work, two
defining characteristics of Wikipedia. Whereas on Wikipedia, readers
find only one entry on, say, the First World War, on knol authors will
submit separate pieces that will compete for advertising dollars.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/techn...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/msg/acc8bc3...
Unless they do some background checks which I doubt, the authors on knol
will be as anonymous as the ones on the Wikipedia-
Personally I think that we need to find a way to add comments as notes
to an article. These comments might be references to contradictory
evidence, with quotes from researchers and links. Then we, the herd,
figure a way to decide when and how to incorperate these revisions
into the "main" article. This way it would evolve without a need for a
reviewing instituion. If the original author disputes the clear
evidence with his or her own evidence then we figure out an acceptable
way to present both views, in the same "main" article. Then we can
emulate a true encyclopedia, on with no head, so to speak, but one
that hones in on truth and evolves.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
17 Dec 2007 09:51:13 AM |
|
|
On Dec 17, 3:54 am, bernardZ <Berna...@nospam.com> wrote:
In article <cdd2940a-6319-44d6-89ff-bdf1ac251593
@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
On Dec 16, 6:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
It should be intersesting to see which standard becomes more popular
and if the other competitor changes their format to the others.
Where Wikipedia promotes collaboration between authors, knol looks set
to foster rivalry. Contributors to knol will not be able to contribute
anonymously and will not be able to edit each other's work, two
defining characteristics of Wikipedia. Whereas on Wikipedia, readers
find only one entry on, say, the First World War, on knol authors will
submit separate pieces that will compete for advertising dollars.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/techn...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/msg/acc8bc3...
Unless they do some background checks which I doubt, the authors on knol
will be as anonymous as the ones on the Wikipedia- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Isn't there an ongoing problem in that many education institutions,
including universities and high schools, are not directly accepting
openly/explicitly wikipedia and google as credible sources?
Well, I'll let somebody else elaborate; because I'm not the biggest
fan of stodgy "orthodox academia."
My perception: Imho, the inrernet supplements and complements
traditional, conventional reference material.
Yeah, the internet can be manipulted in bad faith; but what can't?
I say: The more sources, the better <the "merrier" for ye holiday
celebrants>.
CAVEAT: It is important for all readers to realize that surely most
everyone has a self-interest, perspective and ax to grind; and there
are "biases" & slantings inherently in "facts" and respectable
materials.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bret Cahill" |
|
| Title: Wiki & Knol Most Valuable for Muse Effect |
18 Dec 2007 04:26:26 PM |
|
|
Isn't there =EF=BF=BDan ongoing problem in that many education institution=
s,
including universities and high schools, are not directly accepting
openly/explicitly =EF=BF=BDwikipedia and google as credible sources?
The problem is understanding how to use these services which are most
valuable in getting a discussion started.
They expose you to new fields and knowledge ("you mean they study
that, they can do that?") which is at least as necessary and a lot
more fun than the rigorous library part.
Once you get interested in a subject _then_ you verify the numbers
with real authorities.
Since Wiki is so popular and since a popular understanding of
thermodynamics so critical to energy policy, ASME might commission
some engineers and NY Times quality science writers to do thermo right
on Wiki.
I'm getting sick and tired of telling hobbiests closed cycle won't
work without proper cooling. "Look at a nuke plant. What the biggest
thing you see? The cooling towers. Getting the heat _out_ is as
important as getting it _in_ . . ."
Bret Cahill
"When compared to a genius, that is he who begets or gives birth, the
scholar comes off a bit like an old maid. He's not conversant with
the two most valuable functions of man."
-- Nietzsche
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "turtoni" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
18 Dec 2007 12:55:51 AM |
|
|
On Dec 16, 9:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/techn...
My impression: There is more than one dictionary publisher and more
than one encyclopedia publisher, so I consider what Google proposes
as neither unfair nor monopolistic.
I suppose that I'll be utilizing em both; though if google's ads
become too annoying... byuh-bye
Speaking of annoying:
Google oughta delete or sumthin re excessive repetitive, reiterative
spammy cross postings.
To the person posting: Everybody has angry opinions to express, well,
at least i do.
It would help your argument not to overly-annoy neutral readers (me),
while stating your case as clearly and fully as you can.
There are surely millions of people who have been unfairly hassled by
a big brother (govt authority) or corporation (telephone sales pests)
and they may also try (admittedly) expensive lawsuits.
There is probably a civil liberties or human rights organization et
cetera that would consider helping your case if its presented
appropriately.
Alan Shorr, an attorney in Wm Shattner's and Candy Bergen's law
firm....uh....nevermind.
http://www.bartleby.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: WIKIPEDIA & KNOL: Win-Win |
18 Dec 2007 09:26:57 AM |
|
|
On Dec 18, 1:55 am, turtoni <turt...@fastmail.net> wrote:
On Dec 16, 9:20 pm, Robert Cohen <robtco...@msn.com> wrote:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/techn...
My impression: There is more than one dictionary publisher and more
than one encyclopedia publisher, so I consider what Google proposes
as neither unfair nor monopolistic.
I suppose that I'll be utilizing em both; though if google's ads
become too annoying... byuh-bye
Speaking of annoying:
Google oughta delete or sumthin re excessive repetitive, reiterative
spammy cross postings.
To the person posting: Everybody has angry opinions to express, well,
at least i do.
It would help your argument not to overly-annoy neutral readers (me),
while stating your case as clearly and fully as you can.
There are surely millions of people who have been unfairly hassled by
a big brother (govt authority) or corporation (telephone sales pests)
and they may also try (admittedly) expensive lawsuits.
There is probably a civil liberties or human rights organization et
cetera that would consider helping your case if its presented
appropriately.
Alan Shorr, an attorney in Wm Shattner's and Candy Bergen's law
firm....uh....nevermind.
http://www.bartleby.com/- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Gracias: i bookmarked it as "great reference material"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
