Wikinews - like its sister site, Wikipedia - bills itself as a place without bias. Ostensibly, it's a democratic news source that never answers to a higher power. But that's just a setup for the latest act in the world's greatest online farce. In recent weeks, the Wikimedia Foundation - the not-for-profit that operates Wikinews …
Foundation and Empire
The notion of an organisation that contains true information for all like Aasimov's Encyclopaedia Galactica is an excellent and laudable idea, unfortunately, with human nature being what it is, there is no chance of having some one who can edit the articles accurately and truthfully without colouring the truth with their own version of the truth as they see it. Add to that the fact that ANY organisation is somebody's baby and they will want to see it nurtured and growing in a particular way and you will end up with something like Wikipaedia. As if that wasn't bad enough the qualification for editors is having enough time and inclination to get involved and work your way up and you have a source of the truth `as we know it´not a source of the truth as it is.
Wikipaedia it's time for change!
Three cheers for Wikileaks, without whom most of this story would have no sources
(oh...oh shit... I best not say that out loud, for fear of appearing a wikicultist. Sorry, Cade)
Re: Foundation and Empire
But remember that in Asimov's series, the Encyclopedia Foundation was merely a pretext for setting up an institution, manipulated behind the scenes by the shadowy Second Foundation, to form the nucleus of a Second Galactic Empire.
And let's mention that Hari Seldon's Foundation, ostensibly set up to write the Encyclopaedia Galactica, turned out to be a hoax.
Foundation and Earth?
Obviously teaming up with google and controlling the world is the next step...
What after that? Robots coming out of the woodwork despite no evidence of their existence up to that point? A mysterious clone of the Wikipedia Foundation on the far side of the world? (Ooh, that'd be the EU's attempt at creating a european competitor to google wouldn't it. I wonder how that's going...)
I mentioned the word 'cult' once...
...but I think I got away with it!
Things will change
When I win the open WMF Board seat, I promise that things will change in San Francisco. Yes, I'm actually running.
Three most popular cults
I'll probably get verbally assaulted for saying this, but as I see it, the top three cults in this world are:
Church of Scientology
(and no, not in that particular order).
Re:Re: Foundation and Empire
Let's also remember that Seldon's big idea was toppled by a single Mule...
(now where's the Asimov icon when it's needed?)
Mine's the one with the anti-Wikimedia pamphlet in the pocket - oh no wait, it's been vaporized.
It's interesting to see the death of the once champions of the Internet, not to say the companies are going out of business, but to say they are killing what made the people get behind them, Google and Wikipedia are two good examples of it, selling out on the people who got them there. Thank god for wikileaks, till they get sued or the likes, you know, just to avoid there being any real balance!
Hip, Hip, Hooray for Censorship.
I know there are all these people out there who love the idea of 'Free Speech' but I for one, as a parent, welcome some sort of control and accountability.
The internet is a free and open space and anyone can set up a system like Wikipedia. If you don't like the way a particular collection of information is censored then use another or set up your own. That's what the internet is all about.
I feel outraged at people like Eric Moeller, Ian Clarke or Mike Godwin who think that the sexual exploitation of children is a reasonable price to pay for freedom of speech.
Douglas Adams knew..
"In many of the more relaxed civilizations on the Outer Eastern Rim of the Galaxy, the Hitch Hiker's Guide has already supplanted the great Encyclopedia Galactica as the standard repository of all knowledge and wisdom, for though it has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate, it scores over the older, more pedestrian work in two important respects. First, it is slightly cheaper; and secondly it has the words Don't Panic inscribed in large friendly letters on its cover."
RE: Wiki... (to Daniel)
Well, "Wikipedophiles" now just *has* to become the official term for all wikipedia-lovers.
RE:Re:Re: Foundation and Empire
"Let's also remember that Seldon's big idea was toppled by a single Mule..."
no it was not. the second foundation triamned against the mule and the plan was put back on corse it is never reviles weather gia eventuley absorbes the foundation or not but as the latses time in the last book the foundation is right on corse
Honky Tonk Women
"the second foundation triamned against the mule and the plan was put back on corse it is never reviles weather gia eventuley absorbes the foundation or not but as the latses time in the last book the foundation is right on corse"
I know that it's bad form to point out grammatical mistakes etc, because it comes across as snobbish and intolerant, and it forces the critic to spend an age polishing his own grammar, so as not to be hoist by his own petard. That's a kind of bomb, I think. But seriously, what? Gia? Angelina Jolie's breasts?
In San Francisco? With super English phrases like "super extra careful" I never would have guessed!
re: Three most popular cults
You forgot Apple
@Jolyon Ralph - RE: Wiki... (to Daniel)
"Well, "Wikipedophiles" now just *has* to become the official term for all wikipedia-lovers."
I second the motion....
wikipeds is too long
I would suggest wikipods (yes, they're pod people).
Granted that the Trantorian branch of the Foundation pulled them out, but that was not due to any inherent strengths; just pure luck that the Mule had taken his name for one particular reason.
My hope would be that the current leadership of Jimbo's Foundation gets derailed in a similar way... and more permanently.
That aside, I'm not normally a stickler for correct spelling by others... but in the case of your comment, I am inclined to comment on it. I shall, however, tactfully refrain.
Coat, hat, exit.
OMG TEH CHILDRENZ!!!
While Wikimedia seems to be dealing with the PR over the complaints ineptly, the second one complaint is utter bollocks in the first place - the article in question carried a picture of an album cover that was sold worldwide for 30 years, which is hardly the kind of Horribly Noncey Abuse that the article implies.
[yes, Yanks are more uptight about nudity than everyone else; this reflects the fact that they ran away from Europe because it wasn't puritan enough...]
re: wikipeds is too long
Let's just call them 'pedos.
Just to avoid any confusion you understand.
- Product round-up Too 4K-ing expensive? Five full HD laptops for work and play
- Review We have a winner! Fresh Linux Mint 17.1 – hands down the best
- Vid Antarctic ice THICKER than first feared – penguin-bot boffins
- 'Regin': The 'New Stuxnet' spook-grade SOFTWARE WEAPON described
- You stupid BRICK! PCs running Avast AV can't handle Windows fixes