Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
33 Indlæg 27 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • jmjm@mstdn.socialJ jmjm@mstdn.social

    @AlSweigart PR firms routinely whitewash their clients' articles. But still, pretty good for articles about poor or dead people.

    albanosmani@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
    albanosmani@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
    albanosmani@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #8

    @jmjm @AlSweigart hi

    hosford42@techhub.socialH 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

      It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

      sonofageorge@mstdn.caS This user is from outside of this forum
      sonofageorge@mstdn.caS This user is from outside of this forum
      sonofageorge@mstdn.ca
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #9

      @AlSweigart Jimmy Wales is an interesting guy- lives a very ordinary, humble, even, life. Somewhere in the UK, I think.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

        It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

        freequaybuoy@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
        freequaybuoy@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
        freequaybuoy@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #10

        @AlSweigart And "You can't trust Wikipedia but we have to steal it in its entirety for our slop machines."

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

          It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

          haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.comH This user is from outside of this forum
          haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.comH This user is from outside of this forum
          haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.com
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #11

          @AlSweigart Fair, but if you still can't use a Wikipedia citation as a valid source as a freelancer. At least, no respectable freelancer would do it, least of all me.

          It still exists as a fascinating open-source experiment, even if it's not exactly what anyone would describe as 100% reliable.

          Turns out newspapers having a monopoly on classified ads was actually a very, very good thing for society.

          harlequinbastard@mastodon.socialH ahltorp@mastodon.nuA vatvslpr@c.imV 3 Replies Last reply
          0
          • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

            It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

            squeakypancakes@sunbeam.cityS This user is from outside of this forum
            squeakypancakes@sunbeam.cityS This user is from outside of this forum
            squeakypancakes@sunbeam.city
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #12

            @AlSweigart i will never trust wikipedia with anything related to social issues given how bigoted it is but things measurements are fine.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

              It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

              gbargoud@masto.nycG This user is from outside of this forum
              gbargoud@masto.nycG This user is from outside of this forum
              gbargoud@masto.nyc
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #13

              @AlSweigart

              Also my response to that in school when we were told not to use it for research was just to click through to the references and cite them directly making it a fantastic index and summary

              drwho@masto.hackers.townD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.comH haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.com

                @AlSweigart Fair, but if you still can't use a Wikipedia citation as a valid source as a freelancer. At least, no respectable freelancer would do it, least of all me.

                It still exists as a fascinating open-source experiment, even if it's not exactly what anyone would describe as 100% reliable.

                Turns out newspapers having a monopoly on classified ads was actually a very, very good thing for society.

                harlequinbastard@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                harlequinbastard@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                harlequinbastard@mastodon.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #14

                @haunted_refrigerator @AlSweigart professors in college back in the day would rule out wikipedia for citation. This was hilarious to me as an IT professional.

                What is at the bottom of every wikipedia page?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • gbargoud@masto.nycG gbargoud@masto.nyc

                  @AlSweigart

                  Also my response to that in school when we were told not to use it for research was just to click through to the references and cite them directly making it a fantastic index and summary

                  drwho@masto.hackers.townD This user is from outside of this forum
                  drwho@masto.hackers.townD This user is from outside of this forum
                  drwho@masto.hackers.town
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #15

                  @AlSweigart @gbargoud That's what I do. It's also good for finding links to papers nobody seems to have handy.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.comH haunted_refrigerator@theforkiverse.com

                    @AlSweigart Fair, but if you still can't use a Wikipedia citation as a valid source as a freelancer. At least, no respectable freelancer would do it, least of all me.

                    It still exists as a fascinating open-source experiment, even if it's not exactly what anyone would describe as 100% reliable.

                    Turns out newspapers having a monopoly on classified ads was actually a very, very good thing for society.

                    ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                    ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                    ahltorp@mastodon.nu
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #16

                    @haunted_refrigerator @AlSweigart The reason Wikipedia should not be cited is because it’s an encyclopedia, not because it’s not accurate.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • albanosmani@mastodon.socialA albanosmani@mastodon.social

                      @jmjm @AlSweigart hi

                      hosford42@techhub.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                      hosford42@techhub.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                      hosford42@techhub.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #17

                      @AlbanOsmani@mastodon.social

                      bye

                      @AlSweigart
                      @jmjm

                      seb321@toot.communityS 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                        It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                        fiend_unpleasant@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fiend_unpleasant@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fiend_unpleasant@mastodon.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #18

                        @AlSweigart I remember researching John Wesley and the wikipedia page started out "For a good time call ###-####, also John Wesley (/ˈwɛsli/ WESS-lee;[1] 28 June [O.S. 17 June] 1703 – 2 March 1791) was an Engl..." Still more useful than AI slop.

                        chrastecky@phpc.socialC 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                          It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                          himay@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                          himay@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                          himay@infosec.exchange
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #19

                          @AlSweigart

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                            It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                            iamdannyboling@mstdn.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                            iamdannyboling@mstdn.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                            iamdannyboling@mstdn.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #20

                            @AlSweigart

                            I was once mocked by my cousin and his redneck friends for using Wikipedia to get... a list of US Presidents.

                            I didn't know how to respond to that so I just kept quiet and removed myself from the thread. I *still* don't know how I should have responded to it.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                              It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                              bobkmertz@techhub.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bobkmertz@techhub.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bobkmertz@techhub.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #21

                              @AlSweigart
                              Wikipedia didn't change, the world around it did. Just because everything around it got worse doesn't mean that it got better even if it's now one of the more reliable sources. Checking references on Wikipedia is still an important thing.

                              To be clear, I'm not saying Wikipedia is bad and I agree capitalism is the problem but "trust, but verify" is important to follow.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                                It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                                maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                                maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                                maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizza
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #22

                                @AlSweigart I wouldn't say it's really 'trustworthy'. It still has its limits and flaws. I'm a production editor at a uni press and we discourage our authors from citing it. They should, literally, be doing their own research. However, it has resisted some of the corrosion that has afflicted other media.

                                alsweigart@mastodon.socialA 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • jackeric@beige.partyJ jackeric@beige.party

                                  @AlSweigart can't trust Wikipedia because a swathe of their editors/moderators are actively and maliciously misogynist and/or transphobic, and will reject edits and flag pages as not notable where people give women, particularly trans women, credit

                                  yet it's still less bad than the for-profit sites

                                  himay@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                                  himay@infosec.exchangeH This user is from outside of this forum
                                  himay@infosec.exchange
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #23

                                  @jackeric @AlSweigart That's how crowd sourcing works. It needs people (dare I say community?) to care about it enough to fix the typos and misinformation and lack of properly cited sources. Eventually truth outs (in theory).

                                  But it takes resources to keep everything running and detect the wreckers too. I have never enjoyed donating to an organization more. They graciously accept any amount. Single digit donations are treated exactly the same as hundreds of bucks.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                                    It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                                    xavierlowmiller@hachyderm.ioX This user is from outside of this forum
                                    xavierlowmiller@hachyderm.ioX This user is from outside of this forum
                                    xavierlowmiller@hachyderm.io
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #24

                                    @AlSweigart “it’s a good thing Wikipedia works in practice because it sure doesn’t work in theory”

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • fiend_unpleasant@mastodon.socialF fiend_unpleasant@mastodon.social

                                      @AlSweigart I remember researching John Wesley and the wikipedia page started out "For a good time call ###-####, also John Wesley (/ˈwɛsli/ WESS-lee;[1] 28 June [O.S. 17 June] 1703 – 2 March 1791) was an Engl..." Still more useful than AI slop.

                                      chrastecky@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      chrastecky@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      chrastecky@phpc.social
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #25

                                      @fiend_unpleasant @AlSweigart When I was in high school doing a paper on Al Capone, the Czech Wikipedia had this thing in the "early life" section:

                                      Like every young boy, he liked to beat the meat.

                                      Removing that was my first and so far only Wikipedia edit.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • alsweigart@mastodon.socialA alsweigart@mastodon.social

                                        It will never stop being funny to me that the whole "you can't trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it" scare happened and now Wikipedia is the only trustworthy website because it turns out profit motive is the reason things turn to shit.

                                        alsweigart@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        alsweigart@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        alsweigart@mastodon.social
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #26

                                        "Yeah but what about public bathrooms?" The only reason private bathrooms are clean is because they exclude the 99% of the population who aren't paying customers on that day.

                                        You might as well say capitalism is great if you're rich, or dictatorships are great if you're a crowned prince.

                                        alsweigart@mastodon.socialA 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizzaM maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizza

                                          @AlSweigart I wouldn't say it's really 'trustworthy'. It still has its limits and flaws. I'm a production editor at a uni press and we discourage our authors from citing it. They should, literally, be doing their own research. However, it has resisted some of the corrosion that has afflicted other media.

                                          alsweigart@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          alsweigart@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          alsweigart@mastodon.social
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #27

                                          @maccruiskeen And the reason it's resisted that so well is because it doesn't have followers or favorites or likes or any of that engagement nonsense that social media strives for.

                                          vatvslpr@c.imV 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper