Slashback: Wikipedia, Netwosix, GooglePC 196
Why the media can't get Wikipedia right. Ruff_ilb writes "David Weinberger has published a quite down-to-business look at Wikipedia, the media, and what they have to say about each other. From the article: 'When the mainstream media addressed the John Seigenthaler Sr. affair -- he's the respected journalist who wrote an op-ed in USAToday complaining that slanderously wrong information about him was in Wikipedia for four months -- the subtext couldn't be clearer: The media were implicitly contrasting Wikipedia's credibility to their own. Ironically, some of the media got the story fundamentally wrong, in tone and sometimes in substance,' he writes. 'Wikipedia has been a continuous state of self-criticism that newspapers would do well to emulate. It has discussion pages for every article. It has handled inaccuracies not defensively but with the humble understanding that of course Wikipedia articles will have mistakes, so let's get on with the unending task of improving them. Wikipedia's ambitions are immodest, but Wikipedia is not.'"
Linux Netwosix follows up. LinuxWorld writes "Vincenzo Ciaglia has authored an article that describes his Linux Netwosix release, and answers many questions being posed by developers. He reiterates much of the information that he conveyed in a recent interview with LinuxWorld, but also added some new information. From the article: 'The installation is simple and with the new release, Linux Netwosix 2.0-rc1, there's a new setup tool based on the Crux one that really help every user because it is simple and user-friendly for a security/network oriented GNU/Linux distribution. The Setup script will show a simple list of available 'base' packages you can choose to install on your system.'"
Hwang Woo-suk defends himself. JonN writes "The Korea Herald is reporting that 'disgraced stem cell researcher Hwang Woo-suk recently defended himself insisting he has the technology to produce patient-specific stem cells and that he had been the victim of a "long-planned" conspiracy. An investigation panel at Seoul National University has concluded Hwang did not produce any embryonic stem cells individually tailored to patients as claimed in a paper published in the journal Science last year. Hwang stood by his work in an interview with a local Buddhist newspaper Saturday.'"
Plasma thruster verified by the ESA. JonathanGCohen writes "Researchers at The Australian National University have developed a plasma engine to provide spacecraft with thrust, with implications for future Mars missions. Their design was recently verified by the European Space Agency and will go into full-scale testing next year."
Google dispels PC rumors. JamesAlfaro writes "Google has spoken, and the rumors were merely that. According to a Google spokesman, the company won't be releasing a PC, Internet appliance, or web-enabled toaster anytime soon: 'We have many PC partners who serve their markets exceedingly well and we see no need to enter that market,' a Google spokesman told Times Online. 'We would rather partner with great companies.'"
Looking Back (Score:3, Funny)
"Coming up, a hard look at the pharmaceutical industry, brought to you by the makers of Damitol" Meanwhile, charges that Linux naming convention is too arcane for the common clod abound. Why not call it View? Senator Hillary Clinton on line One. Alas, no Engineering Officer Montgomery Scott to man them. In the meantime they'll partner with AOL.
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
And it's not with Wikipedia? Getting things wrong and then changing them over and over again seems to be the big thing...
But on the other hand, they don't bury their retractions (nay, they archive them), and since it's not an online newspaper, they don'
Re:Looking Back (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
Re:Looking Back (Score:2)
The editor snowed you. Printers aren't allowed to make those kind of decisions. Now editors do all the layout on screen, but even 50 years ago in the days of hot lead, the printer would call the editor and tell he was running long and ask him what to do.
give me a break... (Score:2)
That's hardly accurate.
News media answer to, in rough order: their editor, the ombudsman, the readers, and the civil court system. If a reporter continuously produces inaccurate reports, they're fired...and they're in a very visible profession...getting a job at another paper or station can be quite the challenge if they're a liabli
Re:give me a break... (Score:2)
Cars that were rigged to explode
"The Wall Within" that wasn't
The Killian documents
Those were just off the top of my head. Sure, they found a few scapegoats for those really big ones, but no one important got canned. Hell, Dan Rather got away with crappy journalism for decades before they finally cut him loose. (And even then there's still some question as to whether he didn't just retire.)
Like another poster said, I've been interviewed by reporters a couple times. It almost always leaves a ba
Re:give me a break... (Score:2)
newspapers distinguish between FACT and OPINION.
So does Wikipedia. Fact goes in the main page. Opinion goes in the discussions. If you really think the main page is too boring, go read the revision history or the discussions.
nothing one paper loves more than pointing out the mistakes of another paper.
Except sucking up to the government, at least until recently.
Anyway, back to my
Damn Buddhist newspapers (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Damn Buddhist newspapers (Score:2, Funny)
Ah, grasshopper, you have to master the deja view to see them in this life.
Hwang woo-suk (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hwang woo-suk (Score:2)
Also, an apology may be required as well.
This happens in government a lot.
Re:Hwang woo-suk (Score:2)
Re:Hwang woo-suk (Score:2)
This guy is our equivalent of a rock star there -- paid very well, etc. Koreans hold technological advancement in high esteem as a source of national pride.
So his position is not only a scientific one like we're used to seeing... Academics here in the States are generally just left alone to do their work and publish papers... he is a political figure, and a symbol of "Korean intelligence".
Add in the generally Eastern philosophy that you never ever dishono
Re:Hwang woo-suk (Score:2)
Relying on Wikipedia? Then he could be a 13 year old girl in western Montana.
I keed, I keed...
stem cell honour (Score:2)
Especially those that will have their funding cut.
I got it! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I got it! (Score:2)
Wiki stem cells... interesting (Score:5, Funny)
(Opens fluid-filled chamber)
Cat: Nya!!!! =^_^=
Scientist: Alright, who edited my research wiki!!
Re:I got it! (Score:2)
Yeah, well... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the same media that's been pooh-poohing blogs for over a year now, not to mention at it's also the one that nowadays covers only the most politically insipid stories it can find, and rushes to air and to press the instant there's a tragedy, screwing up the facts for hours.
Sure, Wikipedia wouldn't compare well to actual journalism, but where do you find that nowadays?
Re:Yeah, well... (Score:4, Interesting)
It may wax and wane but I wonder how much "actual journalism" ever existed.
When I was studying journalism and writing for the college paper in the 80's, I used to delight in correcting stories in the local papers. After all, the facts had been wrongly reported--things like chronology, technical or legal process, impacts or consequences--and I felt a responsibility to correct those wrong facts in my story if it were going to press at a later date. :)
It wasn't just the facts. Sometimes the fairy tales my role models wrote simply stunned me and left me gapping like guppy.
Interestingly, it is the generation of journalists who were predominantly college educated, starting in the '70s, that have generated the reputation of the hour for American journalism. I don't know that to be cause and effect. It just seems noteworthy. :)
Claiming a standard isn't in itself anything more than a voiced expectation. To expect Wikipedia to be the final authority might be a mistake. Maybe as much of a mistake as expecting there to be a final authority at all.
Re:Yeah, well... (Score:5, Funny)
Sure, Wikipedia wouldn't compare well to actual journalism, but where do you find that nowadays?
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, of course.
Re:Yeah, well... (Score:2, Interesting)
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, of course.
Don't forget that Steven Colbert has The Word.
Re:Yeah, well... (Score:2, Insightful)
Compare the Wikipedia and Google PC stories (Score:2)
So, for our next trick, lets contrast the "professional media"'s attitude with what just happened with the Google PC story. Someone at the CES expo thought
GooglePC (Score:2)
Google is not an Internet Company (Score:2)
Imagine if Google hooked up with some car-based GPS navigation company and offered to provide their maps and updates.
Google recently tried to get into the print ad game. They bought a page and subdivided it for sale to advertisers. It didn't really pan out, so it doesn't look like Google will keep it alive.
Re:GooglePC (Score:2)
Re:GooglePC (Score:2)
Google Mini [google-store.com]
On the stem cell defense (Score:2)
Re:On the stem cell defense (Score:4, Funny)
Re:On the stem cell defense (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, there are still those that wish to know if the cat was alive or not; here's the truth: Schrödinger's cat was...
*End Carrier: Everett Many-Worlds Decoherence Error. Please notify your ISP*
Re:On the stem cell defense (Score:3, Informative)
Re:On the stem cell defense (Score:2)
Don't trust the media (Score:5, Insightful)
At least with with wikipedia I can change the mistakes when I see them.
Re:Don't trust the media (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't trust the media (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust the media (Score:2)
That'd be the "Think of the Flamingos" section. [tropicalbreezedecor.com]
I for one would welcome our fuzzy pink slipper overlasses...
SB
Hwang Woo-suk defends himself (Score:4, Insightful)
Give the man a lab, the original cell strains, and a month to prove himself under supervision.
If he can do it, he gets the Nobel, Fame and excuses from the community.
If he can't, he has to build shoes or licence plates in a prison until he reimbursed the experiment and paid his time. And he presents excuses to the community.
Problem solved. Next Case, quick, I don't have all day...
Google hasn't dispeled anything (Score:3, Insightful)
They haven't denied anything. They have stated that they aren't going to be making a PC. That doesn't deny the OS or a machine that could be backed with the Google Brand name. I'm going to wait until Friday and see how this turns out with CEO-guy's keynote at CES.
Re:Google hasn't dispeled anything (Score:2)
Give it a rest, will 'ya?
TiVO is losing ground to cheaper cable service-branded PVRs, every attempt to sell the middle class on the Network Appliance has ended in failure, a bloodbath of red ink.
Got to admit about Wikipedia's self-critisism (Score:5, Insightful)
From my point of view, when you read both the article as well as the discussion, you get a -very good- view about the subject.
A lot of articles will never be 100% finished since there are more ways to look at the same thing.
But can't blaim the press for their stories though... they're always trying to get a story out of -anything-.. Owww.. so does slashdot...
Re:Got to admit about Wikipedia's self-critisism (Score:3, Interesting)
What we have learned is (Score:2)
eveything else is usually cool.
Re:Got to admit about Wikipedia's self-critisism (Score:2)
I read a lot of stuff off of the Google News aggregator, and sometimes it's difficult when you read an article from some random small-town newspaper's website, to
Wikipedia and the media are apples and oranges. (Score:4, Insightful)
But the Wikipedia should be "better", right? Thousands of eyes peruse and revise it every hour.
And yet, it's about as useful as an opinion column in a major-city bulldog tabloid.
Blame its lack of real leadership.
Re:Wikipedia and the media are apples and oranges. (Score:2)
I think it is hitting it's goal of providing a source for education very well.
Re:Wikipedia and the media are apples and oranges. (Score:2)
I think the point was its lack of leadership.
Unless that leader was an impartial robotic AI supercomputer that also happens to be Buddhist that can be impatial and have NPOV to all topics of mankind, then those leaders are going to have POV.
And with those opinionated leaders you are going to get opinionated articles. It is human nature. I hate to be a libertarian here, but you have to let the wiki market decide the articles produced and have no regulation other than the wik
Re:Wikipedia and the media are apples and oranges. (Score:2)
I'm working on it.
It's going to look a lot like the wikipedia.
Only without the petty tyrannies and with real instead of ersatz liberalism.
Hate to say it... (Score:2)
Re:Hate to say it... (Score:2)
Wikipedia is designed to encapsulate the error rate nascent in human conversation.
And worse, because its control structure (the admins) drive away honest people (by treating them like vandals at random intervals), the Wikipedia incapsulates even more error.
Re:Wikipedia and the media are apples and oranges. (Score:2)
Besides. It's the '00s. Journalistic integrity died in the 80s when Gannett Corporation put its first steel-box newspaper rack on the corner and started selling the USA Toady.
Should Wikipedia split off Wikipinion? (Score:5, Interesting)
Most of Wikipedia's problems stem from the fact that it calls it's self a free encyclopedia and when people think of encyclopedias they think of "A work containing factual articles on subjects in every field of knowledge, usually arranged alphabetically"
Many of the non-science articles in Wikipedia are as much opinion as fact. The article on my home town was once "When it comes to culture XXXX seems in many ways able only to grasp the most dominant [[trends]] and, once this has occurred, unable to abandon them. Thus explaining the overwhelming popularity of oakley [[sunglasses]] (adopted in the mid-90s) combined with [[mullets]] (circa 1986), [[2Pac]] music, and [[jean jackets]]."
Clearly, marking new and unreviwed articles as opinion would go a long way to help Wiki's image.
or perhaps (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:or perhaps (Score:2)
Re:Should Wikipedia split off Wikipinion? (Score:2)
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Transparency is not modesty.
If you read the Appeal for Donations [wikimediafoundation.org], Wales specifically believes that Wikipedia has the potential to change the world by providing education to people who may need education. Implicity in that belief is that Wikipedia will be accurate enough to be a resource useful for that.
I always hate to knock Wikipedia, because I really do think it's an interesting experiment, but it has very serious flaws. It's biggest flaw is a "Tyranny of Those With The Most Time." There have been a couple of cases where I've tried to make some changes to a particular article that I knew were accurate, but I got some a-hole, who believed they owned the page, reversing my changes because they disagreed with them. Who has time to fight that battle? Apparently the a-hole does, but I certainly don't.
Re:What? (Score:2)
It has been my experience that when you move outside classic geek culture items, ity is stable and accurate.
Now, if it could filter out posts that come from someone sitting in there mothers basement, it would be rock solid!
As an exercise, I did a look up on Gravity [wikipedia.org] , refrigeration [wikipedia.org]
and William Tell [wikipedia.org]
all of those seem pretty darn accurate.
Now, If there was a controversy regarding Astro Boy, I would be very casutious of the information on
Re:What? (Score:5, Informative)
This does indeed happen, but there are things you can do. First, get yourself a user account, and put something about you on your user page. Anonymous users generally have lower standing in Wikipedia discussions. Next, support your changes with citation of a reputable source, and explain them on the Discussion page. In your edit summary, refer to your explanation on the Discussion page. Don't come off as a prick, but be open to changes and improvements.
Now if you are still being reverted, there are two possibilities: the editor is trying to push a certain agenda, or you are. If you are certain it is the former, you can bring up the matter at the Discussion page where editors for that particular field typically hang out; for instance there's a "Wikiproject Chemistry" and a "Wikiproject Chinese cities" etc. If nothing helps, you can post a "Request for Comment" (RfC), but that's a major undertaking.
Re:What? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What? (Score:2)
You just proved his point... You pointed out all the various time-consuming ways that he could, as he puts it, "fight that battle."
Oh, bullshit.
It takes about as long to put a couple of sentences explaining the reason for the change on the talk page as it does to make the change. So, yeah, it's "time-consuming". It takes four minutes instead of two. If you care enough to make the change, it's not a big leap to caring enough to add the explanation so it sticks.
If your change gets reverted in spite
Re:What? (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:2)
In reality, these "talk" sections are ofteb bully pulpits for the people with axes to grind, and don't really accomplish anything. I'm sure there are exceptions but I've seen in time and time again.
You must edit different sorts of articles than I do, or you must make different sorts of edits than I do, because this is not my experience. Another possibility is found in the old saw "If you've run into five assholes this morning, look in the mirror to see the sixth".
Re:What? (Score:2)
Calling me names, for disagreeing with you in a civil manner. Excellent. It would seem you're the asshole, and don't understand why other people have a problem with Wikipedia.
For those keeping score at home... (Score:2)
So, how many are you up to this morning, then? Counting me, of course.
Re:What? (Score:2)
Calling me names, for disagreeing with you in a civil manner.
I didn't call *you* anything. I just pointed out that it's a possibility.
Personally, I try always to keep in mind that when everyone around me irritates me it's likely I am the problem. If you never consider that possibility, then you almost certainly are the problem.
Re:What? (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:2)
Google and the Braille hypocrisy (Score:4, Interesting)
Today Google [google.com] celebrates the birthday of Louis Braille [wikipedia.org], who invented the braille tactile writing system [wikipedia.org] used by the blind community, with a custom homepage logo written in braille. However, the Google Accounts signup page [google.com] does not allow users who use a refreshable braille display [wikipedia.org] to create an account. Blind users are treated as collateral damage in the war against spambots. Is Google acting hypocritical, or am I just a critical hippo?
Re:Google and the Braille hypocrisy (Score:2)
you're just a critical hippo (Score:3, Insightful)
Voice recognition is a mature field these days, so I can imagine it wouldn't be to hard for someone to work around it.
Or maybe it's a feature they haven't gotten around to, maybe it's a feature that never occurred to them.
Instead of complaining on
If you really care about it, feel free to respond with the relevant e-mail address and the text of your e-ma
If you want to submit form, here's how (Score:5, Informative)
Google (like most private companies)
Private? Then what's GOOG [yahoo.com]? Oh, I guess you mean "private sector". Read on:
has no obligation to provide for handicapped users.
The U.S. Congress enacted the Rehabilitation Act soon after the end of the American police action in Vietnam. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act [section508.gov] requires private sector firms that have contracts with the United States Government to make their information technology services accessible to those with disabilities.
feel free to respond with the relevant e-mail address and the text of your e-mail.
I used this form [google.com] to contact Google:
"If you can read this, you do not have images enabled. Please enable images in order to proceed." Given that Google is celebrating Louis Braille's birthday, where is the alternative Google account creation form for users of braille terminals?
I myself do not have such a disability, but my stepmother has a friend who lost her sight, and I saw first-hand what it's like to use a screen reader.
Mod 727027 +999 Informative (Score:2)
Disclaimer: I've had 4 - 12 oz longnecks of Lone Star Beer (only brewed in Texas) and 5 shots of 43% [Avereage alcohol content) of liquor. Believe me
Re:you're just a critical hippo (Score:2)
Bzzt! complete with headers (i've tried to e-mail google) Since the e-mail 'form' has a captcha... well, the fact that the captcha doesn't work for the blind at all (much less the deaf blind) google has completely cut off about 11% of the world population...
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/18/173 0202 [slashdot.org] as some have suggested simply having a 1-800 TDD friendly number to call would be the cheapest/easiest s
Re:you're just a critical hippo (Score:2)
>> Google (like most private companies) has no obligation to provide for handicapped users.
Actually, yes they do.
(in the UK)
Re:Google and the Braille hypocrisy (Score:2)
Re:Google and the Braille hypocrisy (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Google and the Braille hypocrisy (Score:2)
You can send them a text message from a phone.
Which landline phone can send text messages again?
Assuming that by "phone" you meant "mobile phone", and if one can in fact use SMS to override the word verification, then the Google Accounts help pages surely do not mention it. And which mobile phone has a refreshable braille display?
wrong issues (Score:4, Interesting)
IMNSHO, the main problems with wikipedia are:
Re:wrong issues (Score:2)
For most thing it is a very acurate and valuable service.
Last night, it helped me teach my 5 year old girl how a refrigerator keeps the cold in.
Every time I have used it, it has been very accurate.
Biggest issue: academic honesty (Score:2)
Wikipedia (Score:5, Insightful)
To the contrary, I've always viewed Wikipedia as a graffitti wall, in that anybody can scribble anything they want, and anbody else can scribble over that. The difference from other graffitt walls is that it happens to be correct 99% of the time.
Now _there_ is an idea, WikiNews (Score:2)
Obviously this will require a lot of money and infrastructure but the concept is an exciting idea..
Cold fusion (Score:2)
Yeah, maybe it's the same oil companies that were out to get Pons and Fleischmann.
Errmmm... (Score:2)
You know I'd seriously doubt the compentancy of a journalist who can't find the [Edit] link on a webpage.
Google has no plans to make hardware (Score:2)
It seems that Wyse will be making hardware [eweek.com] that runs Google's software. There could be others.
Google has said they are working on software to compete with Microsoft. Think Sun was in on this too.
karma (Score:2)
Well, it's not only on
Hear hear! (Score:2)
I also noticed the NYTimes mention a
Improve your mistakes (Score:3, Funny)
I do improve my mistakes regulary, I'm a proud looser!
Errors in Britannica and textbooks (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:improvement? (Score:2, Funny)
however, i shall now call it an "article", correct the original error, introduce several new ones, sneak in a little paragraph about gandhi sleeping with marilyn monroe while nobody is looking, and announce the imminent utopia.
Re:Ahh, Wikipedia. (Score:2)
Philosophically, we must ask ourselves "Who wrote Light()?"
Re:Ahh, Wikipedia. (Score:2)
And there I was believing the bible... I thought right at the beginning Light() was just declared.
Re:About Google Cube - It's now in discussion (Score:2)
Wait. What smart people get themselves in a room with Ballmer and a chair?
Re:About Google Cube - It's now in discussion (Score:2)
Walmart is moving up-scale. It wants a cut of the high-margin Home Theater market. The HTPC. The X-Box 360. That is something Microsoft has shown it can deliver.