35 Burst results for "Wikipedia"

The GOP Is the Party of Parents

The Charlie Kirk Show

02:33 min | 2 weeks ago

The GOP Is the Party of Parents

"Question. Hey, Charlie, you just mentioned that the Republican Party should be the essentially become the parent party or the parents party. I want you to dive a little deeper into what that might look like from a policy perspective. What should a Republican parent party candidate run on? Well, first, let's start with the very obvious education. Recently, there has been an awakening when it comes to education in America. Parents are starting to wake up to the very same things that we have been warning about for 9 years that the education cartel in America is teaching young people to hate themselves. Hate their peers and hate their country. One of the great awakenings of this last year is how parents are starting to step up and challenge school boards, administrators, and curriculum, selection of what's happening in our schools. Here's one example, cut 100. When I say that America that Republican Party in the conservative movement needs to become the parents party it's to defend moms and dads like this one and cut 100, there's a Texas mom that erupts at the entire school board over a very graphic passage in a school book curriculum. This is going to be it's going to be so hard for some people to hear this. You're going to probably get mad at me for playing it. But this is what 6th graders are being exposed to. When you send them to public school. If you are a parent or grandparent listening right now? I'd say you're 9 year olds are probably being exposed to this if they're in public school. What is the parent party look like? It's removing this type of garbage from schools and representing moms like this one. Play cut 100. Take her out back, we boys figured then hand on the put it in her coin box, put it in her cornhole, grab a hold of that braid, rub that calico. You can find that on page 39 of the book called out of darkness, which you can find at Hudson Ben middle school and be cave middle school. All right, not gonna lie, I had to Google cornhole because I have the game in the back of my yard, but according to Wikipedia, cornhole is a sexual slang vulgarism for anus. I do not want my children to learn about anal sex and middle school. You are supposed to be educating our children. That's what the parent party looks like. People like

Republican Party America Charlie Hudson Ben Middle School Texas Cave Middle School Wikipedia Google
The Paradigm Shift From Science to Religion

The Eric Metaxas Show

03:23 min | Last month

The Paradigm Shift From Science to Religion

"Stephen, you believe, and I also believe that we're at a we can call it a tipping point a paradigm shifting inflection point in western culture where over the decades, the arguments for God have become so strong that with books like yours and others, there's a shift going on. Now, you're really, you're in a world where you talk to actual scientists, do you find that scientists are out there are quietly saying yes, this seems clear, the arguments in your book return of the God hypothesis are compelling. What do you, what do you hear out there in that world? Yeah, I do think there's a shift going on. I was very pleasantly surprised that some of the endorsements that came back from for the book from scientists to whom the publisher had sent it. And very prominent people and Nobel laureate, you mentioned professor Jim tour at rice university. It was one of the top organic chemists in the world and nano and nanotechnology specialist. We've had them. Scientists recently who's come to affiliate with our work at discovery Institutes with top paleontologists in the world who sometime between 2009 and 2016 had a big rethink of the materialistic Darwinian perspective that he had long held and embrace the theory of intelligent design and eventually publicly announced that he had become a theist and indeed even a Christian and be Gunther Beckley a great German paleontologist. Where is he in Germany? He was at the Stuttgart museum of natural history, the largest Natural History Museum of curator there. It was made somewhat unwelcome after he announced that he supported intelligent design. Well, does this get to the idea though that you still have it's just fascinating to me that there are people that say, no, no, no, you can't talk about that. I just find this fascinating because look, we saw this in Galileo's day, right? Galileo says, hey, I've got some evidence here. He was a Christian. Anybody who wants to talk about that in my book, he was a profound Christian. And he says, look, look at the telescope here, the evidence, and they said then, no, no, no, we can't talk about that. That's unseemly, that's preposterous. It's offensive, it's blasphemous. The same thing is happening today. A guy like gunter Beckley tremendous credentials, tremendous credibility in that world. The moment he seems to side with you or people who are theists, suddenly the German scientific world says we don't like you anymore. And also Wikipedia. He was a great paleontologist until he announced this, and then his page was erased. But, you know, I'm really undeterred by that because this thing is catching on worldwide. And it's a bit immodest but for people who wonder, go to my web page, look at the book endorsement. It's amazing the breadth of scientific the breadth of the scientific opinions that have been lodged in favor of this idea that science is pointing

Jim Tour Discovery Institutes Gunther Beckley Stuttgart Museum Of Natural Hi Natural History Museum Of Cura Rice University Stephen Gunter Beckley Galileo Germany
Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin Accused of 'Running PR for the Taliban'

Mike Gallagher Podcast

02:41 min | 3 months ago

Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin Accused of 'Running PR for the Taliban'

"How much of a frenzy is the mainstream media in over this disaster in afghanistan which means a disaster for the by administration now. The washington post has a columnist named jennifer rubin. And i'm not kidding you. She is a singularly spectacularly unpleasant individual if you want some late night enjoyment if you're ever bored and you're you're surfing the internet. Look up the tucker carlson jennifer rubin exchange tucker wright a couple of years ago oh it was brutal it was brutal. She is described as a con of. I guess a former conservative writer but as yuri from our team points out her wikipedia page describes her as a self proclaimed lifelong cuomo democrat. I hate to break it to you if you're a lifelong cuomo democrat. You're no conservative. She's never been a conservative. She's not a but listen to what she's doing now on the pages of the washington post. According to fox news dot com washington post columnist jennifer. Rubin is facing intense backlash over a tweet that appears to promote the taliban. Now she is one of biden's biggest media cheerleaders this conservative however a tweet. She sent out tuesday suggests. She's gone beyond echoing talking points from the white house. She tweeted taliban is asking not telling. We are quote. We are asking the americans. Please change your policy and don't encourage afghans to leave. This lunatic is literally praising the taliban this nut. I mean critics of course immediately pounds. The washington examiner is chief. Congressional correspondent wrote. Are you serious. Gop strategist mike. Whitlam matlock shot back asking at gunpoint. It's one thing to show for the biden ministration. It's another to show for the taliban as they hurt their own people. The podcast comfortably smug accused jen. Ruben of running calm for the taliban while former trump white house aide bed williamson similarly knocked the columnist for running. Pr for the terror group. But this is how nuts the the media doesn't know whether to scratch their watch or wind there but right now when it comes to joe biden and this administration. It's a nightmare

Jennifer Rubin Tucker Wright Cuomo Taliban The Washington Post Com Washington Post Tucker Carlson Yuri Afghanistan Biden Rubin Fox News Whitlam Matlock White House Jennifer Bed Williamson GOP Washington Mike Ruben
Divesting From Biased Mainstream Search Engines

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

01:39 min | 3 months ago

Divesting From Biased Mainstream Search Engines

"Is your advice to d- consumer to the person who wants to use a search engine who wants to have email. Do we just try to divest ourselves of the most dominant platforms. Well when with search engines. I think you know you have to go with the afc. The best results. Sometimes it's going to be google. But i think increasingly it's going to be duct duct especially for nothing about the political topic Wikipedia i would never use with for a political Your wikipedia pages probably full of smears. I imagine Breitbart news media pages every conservative pages full of smith every every political topic completely flown suddenly sneak out all the media's britannica or ever repeatedly or Or things like that we compete. I'd say you know still doing for like matters the uncontroversial for bio like the fictional or something like that I no reason to use email. I wouldn't use me and many other better often. Procam male i think being the bat I would avoid walks out. Facebook is increasingly facebook. Owns one or one You know what's still encrypted but Facebook is trying to enforce its service on what some somehow identity how they're able to enforce that without one of some wet so i would favor either signal telegram as a as a message. Anything else rumble. As well as a great old time we we love rumble and we stream on

AFC Google Facebook Smith
The Medical Establishment Are Guilty of Causing Confusion With Mistruths

The Eric Metaxas Show

02:00 min | 3 months ago

The Medical Establishment Are Guilty of Causing Confusion With Mistruths

"The medical establishment has been so confused over the last year and a half and their messaging has been so confusing. That people don't know whom to trust and is it any wonder that there are so many people saying you've got to get the vaccine and other people saying you must get the vaccine. I have to say. I blame the medical establishment and the government. Of course they have been incredibly sloppy. They undermined their authority to the extent that half the country doesn't take them seriously. Part of that is the pathological lying et. anthony found. She has been the lying. He lied about whether she wear masks. He lied about whether his office funded gain of function bio weapons research in china that led directly to the creation of this disease. Which did he lied before. Congress ran ball connor in that lie. Why this little man and talks like bugs. Bunny is suddenly. The pope came. Who is rules over all other scientists. Why is a mystery to me. The man who invented amarnath therapy has been canceled. Got taken off wikipedia. Trying to pretend he didn't even invent the technology because he said maybe we should only give the vaccine to people in serious written series risk of get close a closed down the entire country of new zealand over one case in australia. They took fourteen twenty four thousand children away from their parents. Cops showed up. Victim up robin to A sports stadium in vaccinated them against their parents wishes. It is bizarre. We are we living in some bad times novel or a jack. Schick tracked suddenly. Everyone is that it doesn't matter if it works. It doesn't matter. If it makes things worse you must do it in a sign of being a decent human being. You must

Anthony Connor Congress China New Zealand Australia Robin Schick
"wikipedia" Discussed on Smashing Security

Smashing Security

07:05 min | 3 months ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on Smashing Security

"Actually seen an image. Instead of the proper description of people's history and background and personal life all the details. I wanna say okay. But i'm not following that so you can carry on i. Maybe i'll catch up so you understand. How is it. How is it the people who are reviewing the screens. Who have a defacement of graham had a sticker of nazi swastika on his screen. Right look up. A picture of joe biden much as long as it was in the right place mean a screen. Yes filled up the entire profile. It was huge. It was a huge. He killed the cash. We just say digital. Stick your actual sticker cronin so the coach to a webpage. Not people have not stuck fun-to-drive and stickers onto your monitor right there pixels didn't realize this simple and lied. You are man's flaming perfectly here. Carry opinions on the is anita monitor works. Yeah the networks. When some people worried they could be virus which hosted these things. Maybe maybe as the computers that had been infected as they were access in all kinds of some people said. Oh it's a troll. It's not actually happening to people. Just want others to go to their wikipedia pages because when they went to look up jennifer lopez waikiki wa wa robert deniro. They wouldn't see. Oh sticker was only some people listening so people that were logged into a specific account. What are we supposed to shut up and listen to you the whole time or is this a discussion. Are we allowed to like pontificate a bed. I'm just asking what happened really garri. We are much more long guys. Enjoy the show. Because who knows how long i will explain. What's been going on the fabulous thing about wikipedia. Also its weakness. Isn't anyone can pretty much had it. Pretty much anything Right john i heard that you have in the past. You've updated entries on. Pg house done all kinds of things. Yes yeah several towns that i've lifted. Its bates do you add like godzilla visited in one thousand nine hundred twenty something. I try to keep it reasonably accurate right. Do you ever post something. A little bit scarlets and naughty untrue. No i don't think i've done that. Person have been in the room and while other people were doing anything i ask. You raise the disapproving eyebrow right. I have a wikipedia. Page someone christian page about me. I don't like to brag but they did. i didn't create it. I'm sure you didn't. Did you pay them a note. Just it's very interesting. Because when someone creates wikipedia page you can see what other pages they created and then personally created. My wikipedia page also created pages about being a pickup artist. Owned sort of methods. Men could use to pull female folks not palum as we've less sue. I think they were creating that article as a pick up the have to pick me up yet done but someone did post fake facts about me on my wikipedia page. Want someone posted. The i'd fought in the bay of pigs. Then you grow number reasons. Why didn't happen such as alive issue. Sure cuba small is though so you know what what these this is. Another bay of small light pigs with wow two weeks off anyway sometimes in that things place on wikipedia either intentionally accidentally or maliciously. I wanted to ask you. Have you been to the scottish version of wikipedia in scottish language in the scottish language. Yes they're over. Fifty thousand wikipedia articles that someone is edited. It's administered by chappie identifies as a christian. Furry in america convinced that if i looked i could find a klingon version of wikipedia. Probably right so. I'm not surprised. That's actually a different language whereas the scottish version of wikipedia appears to have just been written phonetically. Trainspotting was great. It was written fairly old. Speaking in scotch. Yeah i really is. Jesus goes Breed brooke mukta gut tonight. Donna bunny is that kind of thing anyway. Some people wanted the scottish version wikipedia deleted. They said it appears to be just wikipedia read in a broad scottish accent and they also claimed done more damage to the scottish language than anyone else in history and is cultural vassilis on an unprecedented scale. According to him that this is what people crowd say. Yeah it's still exists still up there. Did they choose which pages to translate. I think they just started probably aardvark. I mean how would you start. Yeah right john you probably just go. You know i'm really into pies. I would be a good one. I either either. Things that are related to scotland dean. I think it'd be really fun to have like a franglais one you know. Oh my wig yeah there yeah probably anyway. The appointees anyone can create anything wikipedia and it survives really dependent on the community and wherever they decide. It's not cool. So this is why the nazi imagery. The swastikas began to pimples. Spread for us well. There is a user could xylophone est. Then that's real word. He creates an an account for himself him or herself on the tenth of august and he made a few innocuous. Updates we or entries said godzilla has invited my town or whatever if things which didn't look suspicious their account automatically confirmed after a few days and then he went completely bat shit crazy bunkers. This is what called sleeper tacky. Coming soft you come in slow and then you go crazy and did what. What he did was he edited. Eight temp light. so there are templates on wikipedia. So you will have a template which is used for people's biography right say title summary. Yes children's spouse personal some something like that right and that is used by over tens of thousands by over fifty thousand.

robert deniro garri wikipedia cronin joe biden jennifer lopez godzilla chappie anita graham brooke mukta Donna bunny john Trainspotting cuba america scotland
'The Coming Christian Persecution' by Thomas D. Williams

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

02:11 min | 3 months ago

'The Coming Christian Persecution' by Thomas D. Williams

"Professor you have a book. I think you just let it out of the bag that you have the manuscript back from the publishers super exciting. The title is the coming christian persecution. I'm not trying to be funny here. What do you mean coming. Isn't it already happening if we look at what happened onto isis. What's happening on the boko haram in africa. What's happening to church. Being closed down by the canadian authorities the police in california. I don't mean to belittle the title talk to us. They'll give us a little bit teaser. Of what the books. Main thesis will be well. A teaser would be this. That i look at the beginning on what we understand by the age of christian persecution as so many people still today thank when they think of persecution anything that the roman empire i the martyrs and the coliseum they think of the lions they think of the witness of those early critics which was spectacular. The witness in blood but what they don't realize is the persecution that is worldwide at this point. How many christians in the world live under active persecution. Both authoritarian states and growing way in formerly democratic principled formerly former christendom the west in other words and i think that what they don't realize is that this is very very bad right now. The worst that it's ever been in history and it's not getting better for two main reasons. The drivers of christian persecution are growing stronger every day whether they'd be radical islam with they these still the atheist communists of of north korea and china whether it's something like the hindu nationalism that we see in india especially under narendra. Modi all these things. They're not growing smaller growing greater. But this is happening simultaneously with a lack of willpower on the part of the west to oppose this. We no longer believe that. This something the last acceptable prejudice is the prejudice against christians. And this is something where people wikipedia actually has an entry for This syndrome of christian persecution in other make fun of it as if this is something that doesn't really exist but some people pretend that it

Africa Lions California Narendra North Korea Modi China India Wikipedia
The Truth and The "Big Lie" - Know What You're Being Told

Talk, Tales and Trivia

02:11 min | 3 months ago

The Truth and The "Big Lie" - Know What You're Being Told

"What is the difference between the truth and a lie. We all know that right. Most of us were talked by our parents and teachers are friends and relatives to tell the truth when we are young and so for the most part. We did what we were told. But have you heard of quote unquote the big lie here. We have a definition in wikipedia of the big lie. The big lie is a gross distortion and misrepresentation of the truth used especially as a propaganda technique on the show truth over news. I found that the term the big lie was utilized in the book. Nineteen eighty-four an overarching strategy to turn the truth upside down. And if you haven't read the book. Nineteen eighty four by george orwell high recommend highly examples of this are wars peace freedom is slavery and ignorance is slavery controlling the flow of information would be a recent example of the big lie in hitler's book. Mein kampf my struggle. He originates the idea of the big lie quote. The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is born in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over persistent to the first and most important requirement in quote so we know from this book that for the big lie to work we need repetition and what happens over time hearing that big lie again and again we start to believe the lie to be the truth on the metro dot. Co dot uk website. I've found this about the big lie. The big lie is also termed the illusory truth effect. It is the idea that if you repeat something often enough people will slowly start to believe it's true. A new study has revealed that the illusory truth effect or the big lie is much stronger than we imagined because it turns out that. Even if a person has prior knowledge disproving ally. They're being told they'll still believe the lie. If it's repeated enough

George Orwell UK
Babylon Bee Attacked in ‘False and Defamatory’ Claim That It Pretends to Be Satire

The Eric Metaxas Show

01:40 min | 4 months ago

Babylon Bee Attacked in ‘False and Defamatory’ Claim That It Pretends to Be Satire

"Now we're gonna have to get serious for a moment. Okay this long enough and okay. Now we do have to get serious because you this is. This is really serious. But it's also hilarious. You guys at the babylon be doing intensely. Larry obvious comedy have been attacked by. I don't know the new york times snoops saying that you're putting out false information so please explain because i'm not even joking. That's the world we. We're allowed living in so talk about that. Yeah yeah so. Yeah i mentioned. There's you know. The left is killing comedy by spike choking it. But they're also trying to censor it and what they're trying to censor specifically is comedy like ours. Where their target of it you know. They cannot to be laughed at. They can't bear to have their ideas mocked so instead of just laughing it off a or responding to it with their own jokes They've gone down this route where they've actually tried to smear us as being source of misinformation and the. There's a reason they're doing that so this is to me facebook twitter. You know all the all the social networks were really trying to crack down on misinformation and block it and keep it off their platforms. the left took advantage of that and thought to themselves. Okay well maybe that's how we get rid of the babylon be lump them in world news right and so they started writing all these news articles. The most recent one was the new york times saying that we're far right misinformation site that sometimes traffics and misinformation. I'm quoting them. That's what they said. We had to send them a demand letter and tell them to to remove that from their piece because it was defamatory. It was going to get us band on social networks thing you know. Our wikipedia page is going to say that we're not really a satire sight. Where where we pretend to be. We can mislead

New York Times Larry Twitter Facebook
Amazing Facts You Never Knew About Mars, The Red Planet

Sean Hannity

02:07 min | 4 months ago

Amazing Facts You Never Knew About Mars, The Red Planet

"About Mars. So I did some extensive research online. Or does that mean you just looked at Wikipedia? Yeah. Uh, well, I thought it was cool that Mars is about only about half of the diameter of Earth. It's actually smaller than Earth. Yeah, like we are the bigger brother. Yeah. It got a small scoop of planet stuff. Yeah, that makes it a lot smaller, And that has consequences because it means the gravity on Mars is less right. You stand on surface of Mars. It's basically an instant diet right there. Yeah, yeah, You'll weigh less. You can jump jump higher. You can stand on Mars and Mars bars and still can eat twice as many Um, but it's not just because it's smaller. It's also less dense. Like it's a planet. It's half the size of the earth. Um, but the the planet itself, like the Rockets less dense. Yeah, It's like fluffy. Er Yeah, it's fluff here. Yeah, I think that must be connected right? Because the More stuff. There is the more gravity there is. The more gets compressed like the interior of the sun must be denser than the interior Jupiter, which must be denser than the interior of the earth. Right? So I think there must be a connection between the size of the planet and the density of the interior. Oh, right. Yeah. And another interesting fact I read was that Mars does have an atmosphere. You can go there and there's wind and there's an atmosphere around it. But it's only about 1% of the atmosphere we have here. That's right. Yeah, remarks does not have much of an atmosphere which is pretty important for supporting life. Yeah, okay. And the last cool fact I read was that a day on Mars like if you're standing on Mars a day for you would last one day and 37 minutes. That's right. That's kind of amazing to me because into the length of the day on the planet is just determined by how fast it spins. And you know, these planets could spin at any speed. And so the fact that it lasts just about an Earth day spending at just about the same speed as the Earth. Right? And it turns out a lot of the planet you're spinning at approximately the same speed. We all sort of spun out at the same rate. Yeah, but does that make you like, Want to go to Mars and imagine you get like an extra few minutes every day. Well, not only would you weigh less

Wikipedia Rockets
Wikipedia Co-Founder Jimmy Wales Warns Communists Ruined Platform

Mark Levin

01:27 min | 4 months ago

Wikipedia Co-Founder Jimmy Wales Warns Communists Ruined Platform

"Founder or co founder of Wikipedia. As a warning for all of you. The Daily Mail has reporting. This rest of the media could give a damn Nobody should trust Wikipedia, he says. It's co founder warns Larry Sanger says The site has been taken over by left wing volunteers, quote unquote who write off sources that don't fit their agendas. Fake news They have utterly Destroyed the truth about me on Wikipedia. By their lies by either cherry picking and all the rest. My Children wouldn't recognize me on Wikipedia. It is a pig slop over there. And these volunteers are a bunch of, uh Boot kickers. With their brownshirts. Did he say brown insurance? Should I say pink shirts, either one that's fine by me. Wikipedia can no longer be trusted as a source unbiased information. Since the online encyclopedias left leaning volunteers. They're not left leaning there. Khamis can't on any news that doesn't fit their agenda, according to the sites co founder Larry Sanger 53 co founded Wikipedia in 2001, along with Jimmy Wales. Said the crowd sourcing project has betrayed its original mission. Reflecting the views of the establishment.

Larry Sanger Wikipedia The Daily Mail Khamis Brown Jimmy Wales
A Look Into the Case of the Oakland County Child Killer

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

02:06 min | 5 months ago

A Look Into the Case of the Oakland County Child Killer

"Four kids were murdered. In oakland county michigan in the late seventies and this whole case was called the oakland county child killings and fucking awesome already right so they found a twelve year old boy kidnapped and raped in smothered and that was the first one and Then like a week later of these. I didn't write down. I didn't do my super accurate. Homework are coming here for facts. That are in the wrong place. Yeah and also i. It's all off wikipedia. So you can get and really really. Enjoy it for yourself firsthand. But essentially all eleven twelve year old children and so goes a boy and a girl. A twelve year old girl was found kidnapped not rain. Right bathed fed and then shot point blank and left in the snow. How was the first kid. Killed stir rate smothered smother that. So those aren't the same murder. probably well right they. They don't they probably didn't connect them then. Okay but then the third kid who was an eleven year old boy who was kidnapped and so he was gone for like he disappeared and so on say the seventh day or whatever they went on the parents went on the news and said please You know bring him home so we can give him his favorite jenner kentucky fried chicken and you know the thing they do to personalise and the next day. They found his body. Don't tell me how kentucky fried chicken and valley rate smothered with kentucky fried chicken left in his belly. Exactly what you didn't wanna hear. Oh my and he was also washed like the girl was. His nails were trim his closed spotless. They were washed pressed and his body was still warm when they found so. That's when they knew something. Super terrible was

Oakland County Michigan Kentucky
The Bird Man

Lore

02:03 min | 5 months ago

The Bird Man

"The three massachusetts towns of abington rehoboth and freetown exist a triangular slice of land. That has become home to hundreds of reports of unexplainable phenomenon. It's known as the bridgewater triangle though. Some call it the black triangle or the devil's triangle. It might not be swallowing up. Fighter jets and colonial era ships like the bermuda triangle to the south but its history is just as storied and mysterious. One of the areas within. The triangle is the hawks swamp. It's a seventeen thousand acre wetland near bridgewater massachusetts in the sixteen hundreds it was inhabited by the wapping noah tribe of native americans and the fort. They built inside. It became a strategic location for them during king. Philip's war in sixteen seventy four one legend details how during this time of upheaval and invasion by the colonies. A powerful artifact was lost in the swamp. now. I can't find anything beyond a small wikipedia entry to confirm this but the story tells of how an object known as the wadham belt was lost during the war and as a result the swamp became the home to restless spirits. Ever since the swamp has been the source of nearly endless supply of unexplainable sightings one of the most dramatic and best documented reports was made by local police officer. Sergeant thomas downey on a summer night. In nineteen seventy-one downey was driving toward the town of eastern near a place known as bird hill that sits at the edge of the swamp as he approached the hill he caught sight of an enormous winged creature. Downey claims that it was over six feet tall and had a wingspan of almost twelve feet. After reporting the sighting to the east police he quickly earned the nickname of the birdman about you but it seems odd that a police officer would risk his reputation on such an unusual claim. If it was just a joke officer. He clearly saw something that night. Just what that thing was of course is open to debate

Massachusetts Freetown Abington Rehoboth Bridgewater Sergeant Thomas Downey Philip Downey East Police
The Musical Chairs Between Robert Mueller, John P. Carlin, and Lisa Monaco

The Dan Bongino Show

01:26 min | 5 months ago

The Musical Chairs Between Robert Mueller, John P. Carlin, and Lisa Monaco

"If you go to John Carlin's scam MPD, otherwise known as Wikipedia Page. You'll see on there. That him and Lisa Monaco traded spots in the higher up positions in the Department of Justice Quite often, Look at this. United States, assistant attorney general for the National Security Division. Mm. It was John Carlin. Who was he proceeded by Lisa Monaco, the same people investigating Trump the same person again again. It's my Gator. Here. Acting United States Deputy Attorney general John Carlin. Who succeeded him. Lisa Monaco. It's like musical chairs. Where the deep state then why do the same people keep turning up in these positions all the time? They're both back. Carlin was appointed back into the Biden administration. And so is Monaco. They were key players in the spiky thing, and they're investigating Trump again. For the same thing they did spying on Nunes. And his phone records. This is again think that that Oh, I'm trying to keep this show family friendly. The great fruits on these people. The Democrats don't care. They know the media cover for

Lisa Monaco John Carlin National Security Division Deputy Attorney General John C Department Of Justice Donald Trump United States Wikipedia Biden Administration Carlin Monaco Nunes
How to Write Click-Worthy Episode Titles

The Podcast Accelerator

01:48 min | 5 months ago

How to Write Click-Worthy Episode Titles

"Episode titles easy mc good episode titles are very hard now. You might have heard about something called. Seo in search engine optimization. And here's how wikipedia describes it search engine optimization also known as seo is the process of improving the quality and quantity of website traffic to a website or webpage from search engines. S your targets unpaid traffic. Which is known as natural organic rather than direct or head for traffic own pay. Traffic may originate from different kinds of searches including image search video. Search academic search new search. An industry specific vertical search engines as an internet marketing strategy. S your considered how search engines work the program algorithms that dictate search engine behavior. What people search for the actual search terms or keywords typed into search engines and which search engines are by their target audience. Seo is performed because a website will receive more visitors from a search engine when a website runs higher on the search engine results pages than their competitors. These visits can then potentially be converted into customer. So that's you know not be long winded. But there's a reason for them because i've paraphrased in of rewritten as it relates to podcast. Let me give you the podcast version of all right search engine optimization. S is the process of improving the quality and quantity of new listeners to a podcast from search engines as a podcast marketing strategy. S your considers. How search engines work the algorithms. What people search for and preferences

Wikipedia SEO
Travel to Benin - Rachel Décoste

The Amateur Traveler Podcast

02:04 min | 6 months ago

Travel to Benin - Rachel Décoste

"Or wikipedia. Wants me to say benin. But i will defer to the guest here. I'd like to welcome to the show. Rachel day cost from year of return. Book dot com. And who has come to talk to us about the country of been in rachel. Welcome to the show. Happy to be here first of all. We're probably gonna need to put this on a map because some people are wildly googling right now in wikipedia where is the country have been in innocent a west africa the biggest countries nearby our nigeria and ghana. And why did you find yourself in banana in the first place. Let's start with that. I did a dna test years ago. I am african canadian. Meaning my ancestors. Came here as enslaved africans. We don't know where from and i thought. Dna tests would be a good way to find out where my origins were from. After i did the dna tests been in was one of the top countries along with togo. Nigeria the whole region. Really and then. I took a trip there for six months and been in was one of the five countries. I visited excellent. And why should someone go to in. What i loved about. Being in was that it was authentic in terms of it hasn't yet been too americanized to westernize is still wear the traditional clothes. Drink their traditional tease ethan traditional food and it really felt like you were transported back to a time. They've kept their culture almost intact. And that's why you would want to go to benin versus another country that might be more westernized. There's something authentic inorganic about banana. That is so heartwarming. Banana is a small country. As i recall. It's actually a smaller country in africa. But it's the same size approximately the same size of ohio. Which always surprises

Benin Nigeria West Africa Rachel Ghana Togo Africa Ohio
Anti-Islam Dutch MP Turned Muslim Joram Van Klaveren

TMV Podcast

03:23 min | 7 months ago

Anti-Islam Dutch MP Turned Muslim Joram Van Klaveren

"Name is your own clapper's you're already mentioned and and i used to be a member of the dutch parliament's And it was a representative for the anti islamic freedom party of culas even spokesperson on this subject of islam In parliament. And i did it for many years and when this is debris Introductions how summary and what i did was After i left the party. Because i left the party i feel very anti-islamic than what i did was Fulfiling alone held decided. It was writing anti-islam book but during the writing i came across so much information was at odds with the things i usually Brought the audience in the netherlands. The things i spoke about in In in the dutch parliament delegation radio and oleander media channels here so I came across so much information was it was at odds with the things i usually mentioned at. I started researching at everything again and I i wrote to several authorities on subjects of islam judaism and christianity. Because i'm from a very conservative protestant backgrounds as oh. My upbringing was in indepth corner. And what i did was trying to figure out what what the truth was with. A capital. t. Sodas as or i was very anti-islam but i wanted to be a correct book so i didn't want to have any mistakes. Fb honest so what i did was also trying to catch The few of muslim. So what i did was writing to some authorities also islamic origin one of the persons. I wrote to shelter hockey morad. Some claims university team windsor english name and i thought he was going to write me back. Because i put a little wikipedia link at the end of my email and add some questions. But i didn't want to fool himself say so what it was to be honest and i thought that he would never answer me because of course why shoot. He answered an anti-islamic politician from another country. But it took a couple of weeks and think about six or seven weeks and in the anti e send me very extensive answer very extensive because i read it on my My telephone against the because it's gaza. It was about sixteen seventeen pages so it's very expensive. And what he did was trying to answer questions. I asked him in the email. Why is this. Why do you do this. What's the thought behind his dead wife. This might set. So that's what he did and then at the same time. He pointed to other scholars. The of that some books gave me titles at seth and then what he says. Well i'm not going to comfort you. Obviously because it was the first male He said to me well. What you have to do is reread all your books. All your anti islamic books read them again but if you read them read this book snacks to your anti islamic books and he said well you then you can see where they take the wrong turn.

Dutch Parliament Anti Islamic Freedom Party Of Parliament The Netherlands Windsor Hockey Gaza Seth
The Vigil (Featuring Josh Bell)

Piecing It Together Podcast

06:28 min | 9 months ago

The Vigil (Featuring Josh Bell)

"Talk the vigil okay. Josh bell is back with us on the podcast josh. How's it going man. It's going all right. How are you. I'm alright watching a ton of movies. As i know you are always including including this weird one. The vigil this is. This is something i found out about through you through your review and immediately spoke to me. Of course i do love. Jewish demons are. You are jewish demon. Maybe that's right. Thank you josh. I'm putting that as a poll quo. My next prided right. Where did you find out about. It was something that like a- did you know this was coming. Or is it something just kinda popped up out of nowhere. I mean it's a it's an ifc released. So i get you know press releases and she'll rules from their pr folks. So i knew that it was coming. I think it had played a number of festivals. Maybe even going all the way back to playing some person festivals. I think it was it was doing that circuit for a while. So i may or may not have heard about it before then but certainly when i saw it as an upcoming ifc release. It intrigued me and And i pitched the review and got the chance to write about it. Which was cool and i certainly also i'm interested in this whole jewish horror angle. Which is not a common thing but is a thing which will talk about more. There's so many horror movies now. It seems like every week. There's like you know so many horror movies that come out and so many deal with you know either you know possession or some form of religious iconography so like to get this jewish angle definitely at least makes it something interesting and different right. I mean and i yeah certainly i. I write about a ton of horror movies whether it's full reviews like this or in my little. Vod column that. i write And it seems like in this past year with people in the lockdown. And whatever. And i i don't know if it's The world is scary and people want to see that reflected in movies or they want to watch movies where the scary stuff ends. But certainly there have been a lot of horror movies. And but i think this one does kind of rise above with the way that it approaches the subject matter in this in this unique way even though it does also do a lot of very familiar horror. Movie things sure. Yeah and and that score gets very very loud at times as many horror movies do it does. And there's some some some jump moments or whatever and i didn't feel like they were cheap necessarily. I felt like they fit with. What the character that. You're you're in the perspective of this main character as he's in these circumstances but i can understand if you felt like this was too many basic horror movie things and not enough to set it apart. I think you didn't like this movie as much as i did. Oh no i. I did like it but maybe not as much as you did because yeah it does it does have a lot of those tropes in it but i i do very much appreciate when a horror movie can at least try to do something different. You know. it's this movie definitely does and We'll get into a lot of those differences as were going through this thing. Why don't we jump into puzzle pieces. What you for your first one. Well my first one is Sort of as we were just saying sort of the bad version of this movie called the possession from two thousand twelve. That is a completely forgettable. Generic horror movie. That i had to look up on wikipedia to remember. Virtually anything about. Even though i saw it in the theater But it also involves this jewish mysticism and jewish the as the source of its horror. And i remember watching it and thinking. This movie is really dumb but at the same time i appreciate that it's dumb. It's using a different source material to be tom. It involves it involves a book. Which is i think. The the sort of jewish demon or whatever that people are most aware of An an a box that Is a thing that contains this demon and of course the dumb characters. They buy the box at a garage sale and get some some. Not good stuff happens and cure. Ascetic is is the main star of it. And jeffrey dean. Morgan and i don't remember for sure. But i don't think the characters are even jewish. I think it's just their random people and they picked up. You know just like in a weird way like the exoticism of an older horror movie. Which were they would buy like a more. We're told them from africa or would have a demon in it and it would mess with them so it's not a good movie but i think it points to the way that you could do this poorly just kind of reach out and i don't know if the filmmakers behind that film or jewish at all verses This filmmaker who get someone who went to rabbinical school and he's got this very strong jewish background So i can't recommend it. But i think i i wonder if he maybe saw that movie or looked to that movie and thought okay. Here's a mainstream movie with some of these ideas and that is a way to think that maybe people will accept my movie. Yeah no absolutely. I don't remember if i ever actually saw that one. I probably did at some point. But i think it's interesting though just to speak to the the fact that the characters possibly weren't even jewish like it's funny that us jews like. I don't even think we know this dark. Like creepy side of judaism. Because we just don't really pay attention to that stuff. It seems like at least most of us. I think i mean maybe it's just because there's so many more horror movies about christian mythology. But i feel like the demonic side of christianity is a lot more prominent even an stream christians so i'm just looking and and and to be fair to the possession of the main characters. I don't think our jewish but they do eventually consult a rabbi played by modest yahoo of course okay these are things i didn't even remember but i'm just thinking we competed. How can you forgive modest. Yahoo i know that's up to him. I mean he's i mean obviously if they're like we need a jewish pop culture guy who you know. He seems like the right one to go to. I suppose

Josh Josh Bell IFC Jeffrey Dean TOM Morgan Africa Yahoo
Tape that: Dutch inventor of audio cassette dies at age 94

TechFan

04:45 min | 9 months ago

Tape that: Dutch inventor of audio cassette dies at age 94

"Let's jump into tech fan here since you know we. We just mentioned about recording stuff off the right. Yeah yeah kinda sad news and we're also doing this as part of our wookey. Trolling thing but I saw this i. I'm i'm kinda glad. I i saw you know five seconds while i was on a lunch break looking on my phone. I saw and i thought. Oh that'd be something we're talking about so go ahead. What well this is This is the guy who invented tightly. Walton's died at the ripe old age of ninety four. Yeah a law people forget nowadays that philips the dutch company invented this stuff named ventured the compaq says as being the lead on the compact disc. It's funny his goal. I'm looking at the los angeles times. Obituary that you linked his goal is making tapes and their players. Far more portable and easier to use because. Look the cassette. Tape wasn't the beginning of Recording to a magnetic tape they had real to reel that that was invented and twenty three And they had a in recording studios in radio. Stations is early as the thirties and it was very complex stuff to use. This guy took that basic concept and although the tapes were a little different And he wanted he had. He carried a block of wood in his pocket and the goal was to have the player and a tape. Take up about same amount of space and you can't really argue with his success And think about you know he. He basically created an entire industry from his invention. So while we talk about this guy. Let's talk about the cassette tape as well. Because it's our wikipedia. Wiki trolling Commonly called the tape cassette cassette tape audio cassette or simply tape or cassette. It would to me. It was always those were always interchangeable. Do you got you got a blink tape you gotta cassatt you got you and you had really two kinds you had the prerecorded cassette which was records like. We were talking about earlier albums Do you remember the single cassettes. It would be one song young. Rip off to me. I think i had a couple of days. Oh everybody hype blank tape. Yeah it was just people people. Some people want to listen to singles call Yeah there's two things that conduct strikes strikes me about except tape. First of all is the miniaturization they something that was expensive and very fiddly a bake. There's something really was only yes. They're professionals or for very rich people. Yeah and they miniaturized it to something that the allowed portability and transform them the way we listen to music but the second thing for me. I you know anybody who's ever use cassette tapes now the every now and again there. We go wrong with tangled up in your player and it used to be the you know if a tangled up. Somebody's car you wonder. If sometimes you just wander around on the street or in accomplish something you need to see. The massive tangle of time resources obviously yanked out they call yanked till the bits that the come off and then and the end it was broken at that point and then just come thrown on the street when people to listenable A new see those long around but generally they were absolutely you know they were pretty reliable. Not particularly high quality but pretty reliable. And i think the reliability they built into that platform it really astonishes me more than anything else because it was completely mechanical and yet You ninety five percent the time. It was relatively flawlessly. It was introduced in september nineteen sixty. Three came in two forms already recorded content in prerecord content. Remember when you found out that you could stick a piece of paper or something in the little hole at the top and record over. A prerecorded tape mess right. Yeah that little tab out so you could. Nobody could record over that. That six you'd make you'd make a mix tape for someone. You had a bus. That little thing screwing up my mix tape. Technology was originally designed for dictation machines but improvements of fidelity led to the compact cassette to supplement the stereo eight track cartridge in reel to reel tape recording in most non-professional applications

Walton Los Angeles Times Philips Compaq
"wikipedia" Discussed on Short Wave

Short Wave

09:46 min | 11 months ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on Short Wave

"So today. We're speaking with just weighed in experimental. Physicists at college. London and every night for the past three years just has written a wikipedia entry about a woman or poc scientists. And if this sounds like a big commitment that's because it is. But what motivates. Just keep with. It is the possibility of using wikipedia to combat the bias. In science. We see it in who gets through peer review. We see it in who gets big papers. Cited we see who gets big grants. We see it and who wins awards. And that means that the people that we celebrate and champion incredibly homogeneous and when wikipedia launched the internet was a very small space and it was very dominated by particular types of people. This kind of you know. Tech bro attitude that we still see in silicon valley and places like that majority white majority western a lot from north america some from western europe and those were the first people to start using it engaging in contributing to wikipedia backed according to a twenty twenty study. Eighty seven percents of wikipedia. Contributors are men with media includes wikipedia wick wicky quote a bunch of other platforms and for just this bias in. Authorship creates a bias in who gets a biography so this huge systematic bias against women against people of color against people from the global south against people who are from any kind of particular marginalized group. So it's kind of two things when we have a very diverse editorship and to the things they writes about a not very diverse and this is obviously impacted by the way that science celebrates people and who took about who we define as notable. Right right just to confirm by. Now you've written what nine hundred articles for the site. Oh no no. How many i've written i've written one thousand two hundred one thousand two hundred whatever so sub usually get a bit excited so obviously that's not three hundred sixty five times three so sometimes i get a little carried away but in general i try and stick to one a day sometimes. Yeah yeah. I mean. I've been going for three. Yes so i've done a pretty good job that in those i. We thought a lot about how to ask you this question. Because twelve hundred articles is an extraordinary accomplishment as far as contributing to this encyclopedia. And so the question we're going to go with is if you could build a quarantine bubble with some of the people that you've written about living or deceased who would you include and why should question so so for sure. I'd have to have some of the people developing vaccines enough air. The person who created the oxford vaccine which is is the vaccine this just been approved for use in the uk. A viral vector vaccine is a phenomenal professor. Sara gilbert sara gilbert has had this kind of fascinating rich directory working on the development of a whole bunch of different vaccines that can walk in different corona viruses and kiss kubat. I don't know if you've come across any of your reporting. She's she's a young african american women who is at the national institute of health and had walked back scenes for for sars and mers. So has this really great legacy but also alongside. I kind of scientific research. An extraordinary publication list works to support people from undeserved communities and walks to really amplify the voices of scientists who too often overlooked but also to support young people and getting into an ethic about science. So that people at different ends of that curric- his kizzie is still very young. Where saratoga established professor but both of them have this kind of extraordinary pathway to really ultimately creating the thing. That's going to save the entire world so suddenly. If i if i had according to about they would be in it. I think that. I mean how many people might out in my quarantine babo because i could keep going. There's no official guidance but the often cited wisdom is less than ten. I'm so primed and ready to tell you stories about everyone. I'm so excited about them. So mainly because i have been. She's someone who i wrote about right at the beginning of my wikipedia. A mathematician who gladys west. She was born in virginia in the thousand nine hundred and she went to college. She went to a historically black college and university to study maths. She goes off in becomes the teach <hes>. She then eventually what the us government. Wes she did the early computations and calculations for gps so for all of the technologies that almost everything that we do day to day relies on. Now you know you get in your car keys your phone. You try and navigate took particular location. You use the technology that gladys west created. And when i made gladys west page in two thousand eighteen is really hard to find. Information about. Her book is what for the us government so lots of things are adopted. A couple of months. After i put the page live so after i'd finished writing it and put it onto wikipedia. She was selected by the bbc is one of the top one hundred women so she went into the kind of top one hundred women in the world for any intentional creation. Contribution ebba and when you're on a web page like fat when you're on a page so much traffic and insight people hop over to the wikipedia page really quickly so you could just see the numbers of page views of of the wikipedia. Page going up and up and that meant that more and more people contributed to it so grew story grew. How did that make you feel. I just loved it. I was reflecting on this a lot with with my parents lockdown wife. I kept going live. I kept doing this. And i find nothing more rewarding honestly than seeing other people get recognized then champion for what they've done so absolutely love to have quarantine bubble that so many things that i want us. Yeah and you're collecting. I suppose historical information across different websites and books to write these biographies. Has it ever feel like time travel. Yeah completely does feel like time travel. It's it's so it's so interesting. The things that i find kind of thrilling and exciting now feels such a kind of privilege in a rush to be able to get access to all of the resources that we can do. Now you know online libraries. Nine archives sites archived magazines scientific journals extraordinary places that that turn to for this and there are times when you just feel like fantastic achievement. So so if you see in a lot of the world's when women get married they take their partner's name so sometimes it's quite difficult to find out things about their lives if they got married and all of their publications in this new name. And when you find that one link that one connection that tells you that maiden name and then you can go back and find their phd thesis or who was there examining all this extra level of information. So when i get to that. I'm like jump off the sofer like this is great and say yeah. It's completely like a portal into another world. Right i mean. I've chills just listening to you. Talk about this kind of forensic reconstruction of people's lives and who they were outside of who. They married or other kinds of societal markers of that. Yeah a big part of it. I think a big part of my efforts wikipedia. Who i've met the people that we've trained editor phones is to not just make pages about women no make pages about people of color but to make them as good as the comparable page would-be about a white man. Yeah yeah you've been amazing way of connecting all these dots. I really appreciate hearing that <hes>. I wanna ask you one one last thing. Which is i know that in a lot of ways just talking to you. It sounds like this project is part of such a bigger desire to see science really include nbc driven by all kinds of people. And what do you think it will really take to bring more women and poc's into science so that they stay. Oh such a good question and such a huge one. I mean they're very preliminary simple things that low hanging fruit. If you will know why we don't already have in place you know proper care and support for people who have caring responsibilities so whether that's you know elderly parents or sick parents or especially now in the pandemic who seeing the importance of the childcare and how that skin influence women scientific careers if they're having to work from home but i think more than that we need to really look a scientific institutions and ask really critical questions about why people are leaving. Why do we see. So few black professes. Why do we see so few women in position of leadership. Why do lgbt he. Plus scientists not feel comfortable being out when they're in the scientific workplace and then really put money to and take action to address those individual needs. But i think from a kind of how you get more diverse people into science. I really honestly think the answer is improving our education systems and really support our teachers better. Pay them as well as we pay are bankers so that they stay and so that they create kind of inspiring science lessons. Then go out and got this next generation to come in who keep pushing for this change that we want

cairo npr wikipedia emily london jess
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

03:22 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Mean Arcade very well may have made that same joke. Okay, but I don't read pending pending arcade. I know it wasn't fitting arcade all right well, that's fair. I'm not. I'm not criticizing the. Comics any more I. Just don't have the time share, but I used to read a lot of them I recall seeing that that as well at any rate whoever created it? Somebody somebody right Intel. All otherwise I used to what you know. What's worse I used to have these pinned up in my cubicle. They're not up there anymore, but I used I can't even remember, but I used to have a whole bunch of them. But anyway not, that's one of the things. That's one of those things that you could joke about. Is that that seemingly? Irrelevant things would get a huge amount of attention because they were, they were interesting. You know especially stuffing Geek culture that people are really really passionate. Interested in like you know, which again shows you why? They're these wikileaks now? That exist all around these properties. Perfect format for that kind of level of minutia of of interstate entail I, mean it's ridiculous when I can look up a comic book character and see every single iteration of that comic book character, and then I look up. An someone who is fundamentally important in some huge moment in history, and they have a fraction of the. Not Not that you couldn't cover the important contributions of that person. In that amount of space, you might be able to, but it just gives you this weird feeling like if I were to put these scales whereas this one so heavy. You know we Kapiti is as as of January two, thousand, thirteen, the fifth most popular website in the world behind only Google Yahoo Microsoft and facebook, and in fact ahead of Amazon Apple and Ebay. And again there's a lot of valuable stuff on there. So I know that we definitely kind of criticized wikipedia quite a bit in this this podcast, but keep in mind. We're talking about specifically in the use for things like academic public academic research and I want to say what we do what Jonathan. I both do I think is We'll did say already. We we, we go to Wikipedia and we go straight to the resource sexual. References you take. A look and see like because there. You can learn more about you know. Go to the the the places where the people who have written the article on wikipedia where they got their information from because I mean also. Allows you to remove the interpreter as well right because anytime. You're reading an article on Wikipedia. You're reading an interpretation of someone else's stuff. Because you know there's another thing we didn't mention on Wikipedia. You do not publish primary information. You don't publish information for the first time. Typically against the rules you have to you have to. If you're going to present a fact that someone could look up and verify or reject. You have to be able to sight it and that wraps up another classic episode of Tech Stuff. Hope. You guys enjoyed it. If you have any suggestions for future tech, stuff topics, no matter what it may be if it's a company or technology trend in tech. Maybe it's a great innovator. New would like to have sort of a biography of that person. Let me know you can reach out to me on twitter or on facebook. We use the handle.

Wikipedia facebook Intel Kapiti twitter Jonathan Amazon Google Ebay Microsoft
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

03:22 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Mean Arcade very well may have made that same joke. Okay, but I don't read pending pending arcade. I know it wasn't fitting arcade all right well, that's fair. I'm not. I'm not criticizing the. Comics any more I. Just don't have the time share, but I used to read a lot of them I recall seeing that that as well at any rate whoever created it? Somebody somebody right Intel. All otherwise I used to what you know. What's worse I used to have these pinned up in my cubicle. They're not up there anymore, but I used I can't even remember, but I used to have a whole bunch of them. But anyway not, that's one of the things. That's one of those things that you could joke about. Is that that seemingly? Irrelevant things would get a huge amount of attention because they were, they were interesting. You know especially stuffing Geek culture that people are really really passionate. Interested in like you know, which again shows you why? They're these wikileaks now? That exist all around these properties. Perfect format for that kind of level of minutia of of interstate entail I, mean it's ridiculous when I can look up a comic book character and see every single iteration of that comic book character, and then I look up. An someone who is fundamentally important in some huge moment in history, and they have a fraction of the. Not Not that you couldn't cover the important contributions of that person. In that amount of space, you might be able to, but it just gives you this weird feeling like if I were to put these scales whereas this one so heavy. You know we Kapiti is as as of January two, thousand, thirteen, the fifth most popular website in the world behind only Google Yahoo Microsoft and facebook, and in fact ahead of Amazon Apple and Ebay. And again there's a lot of valuable stuff on there. So I know that we definitely kind of criticized wikipedia quite a bit in this this podcast, but keep in mind. We're talking about specifically in the use for things like academic public academic research and I want to say what we do what Jonathan. I both do I think is We'll did say already. We we, we go to Wikipedia and we go straight to the resource sexual. References you take. A look and see like because there. You can learn more about you know. Go to the the the places where the people who have written the article on wikipedia where they got their information from because I mean also. Allows you to remove the interpreter as well right because anytime. You're reading an article on Wikipedia. You're reading an interpretation of someone else's stuff. Because you know there's another thing we didn't mention on Wikipedia. You do not publish primary information. You don't publish information for the first time. Typically against the rules you have to you have to. If you're going to present a fact that someone could look up and verify or reject. You have to be able to sight it and that wraps up another classic episode of Tech Stuff. Hope. You guys enjoyed it. If you have any suggestions for future tech, stuff topics, no matter what it may be if it's a company or technology trend in tech. Maybe it's a great innovator. New would like to have sort of a biography of that person. Let me know you can reach out to me on twitter or on facebook. We use the handle.

Wikipedia facebook Intel Kapiti twitter Jonathan Amazon Google Ebay Microsoft
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

11:39 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Nine hundred down? Actually we're going to wrap up the timeline pre two thousand twelve. The big story I have was of course that Wikipedia took place in the blackout day on January eighteenth of Sopa Piper. Pippa sorry that's fine. You haven't you haven't been through the whole ordeal of talking about SOPA and PIPPA. I call it pipe for about three weeks until everyone else technology just consistently called Pippen as our final been wrong. This whole time But yeah so Ben. Pippa those were of course. The online piracy acts that were in consideration in Congress in the United States and several sites ended up doing blackouts to protest. This proposed legislation to bring more attention to and say these the way these these laws or these. These potential laws are worded. They could seriously harm the operation of the Internet and cause trouble to lots of people and lots of organizations and they should not be turned into law and then in two thousand thirteen over but before before we leave two dozen important cultural note that is the year that encyclopedia Britannica ceased publishing on paper. After two hundred forty four years of doing. So you know there's also kind of interesting there was I remember and I didn't read the sound bite my research because it didn't actually didn't occur to me while I was researching it but I remember specifically. There was a time when wikipedia was starting to consider looking for experts to send in articles. Just like the old new pedia days they were. They were actually thinking about going to experts to get expert subject. Matter experts to write information from Wikipedia at the same time Britannica was looking at the possibility of crowd sourcing article so like for a moment that these two models were about the flip flop. That didn't actually happen that way. But I remember hearing about that or my brain just invented one of two all also interesting cultural point in between two thousand eight and two thousand twelve this kind of dead space that that we have created. I in our timeline here. Though we can media foundation total assets went from five point. Six million to about forty nine point three million again. It's existing on donation donations only and so and that's that's fabulous for the concept of shared knowledge. I think right then also really interesting to see what kind of I mean to know. Exactly what they mean when they when they have this giant banners every year. To Beg for money when you see. Jimmy Wales faced on there saying on every page. Yeah give money so this can continue to exist. I mean and not that. You shouldn't donate I. I just think that it's it's an. Interestingly it's a really cool number and I think it's IT'S. It's cool that they took that approach. I mean it definitely gives them the benefit of saying look. We're not beholden to any organization or company. We are accepting nationlly crab crowdsource and this. This is really meant to be a tool to enrich the the human race. It's meant to really make things better for everybody and it's not meant to be the platform for one company to say. Hey buy our stuff instead of that other guy stuff right one. Two thousand thirteen speaking about companies. So let's let's hear earlier this year. A story broke that British Petroleum or BP. I should say beep beep as the Brits hate it when I say British Petroleum because they said look you don't bring us into the story was edited. Its own wikipedia. Page maybe rewriting up to forty four percent of the content in order to make the environmental impact of the oil spell the deep horizon and the Gulf to make that seem less bad. Maybe it's kind of hard to word this properly. But essentially they sort of whitewashed the The disaster and the follow up to it And here here's I'm quoting this directly from C net which reported on this be is not directly editing. It's page but instead has apparently inserted a BP representative into the editing community who provides wikipedia editors with text. The text is then copied as is onto the page by wikipedia editors while readers are none the wiser than sections pretending to be unbiased. Information are in fact vetted by higher ups at BP before hitting the page bb's image cleanup cleverly skirts wikipedia editorial rules wherein wikipedia editors are using text that BP posts on Wikipedia self as the source although the text is not published on BP's website this way the significant involvement of EP in its own entry is completely hidden from wikipedia readers while wikipedia editors as usual argue and attack each other over editorial policy while favorable. Pr Editing Continues. Right and all right so there. There's really one person who is demanding. These changes Someone by the name of Arturo Silver Are Silva Pardon me. He was from the Corporate Communications Department in Houston and And he was actually going through the correct channels to submit these changes he he suggested the change to editors he identified himself as a BP employees to those editors essentially. What was happening was that he was playing by the rules in good faith aside from the part that that was still whitewashing whitewashing whole Jewish right so when we were talking about earlier about how you know Jimmy. Wales had edited his own his own article and that he should have gone through the proper channels. These are those channels that we were talking about. This is what the person was doing but it was still putting in possibly you know you might say what bias information is clearly. I mean clearly biased. It's from the company that the pages about so you can't you know. There's no way it can be unbiased if I ride my own wikipedia page. That's going to be biased. Even if I think I'm being objective I'm still gonNA talk about how frigging awesome. I you know trail right but I look at that point. I would personally speaking as an editor so I might be a little bit Uppity ABOUT IT. I I would blame. Editors has because if they're not if they're not going like maybe not the right source to trust with information from And this is going beyond a factual a clearly factual chain. They're not showing good editorial judgment correct. Yeah I agree with that and And so you know Jimmy Wales actually came down again and said that that while BP is saying essentially that they play by the rules he said that's not what the rules are there to protect right. The rules are there to protect against the kind of stuff that this this company is pulling. It's just this company is pulling the tricks within the context of the rules which either means that. The rules themselves are faulty. Or The people who are who are in charge. Like the editors like you were saying. Lauren are faulty. At any rate. This is something that if you know. I don't want to put words into Wales this but I assume from what he has said he would not want this to have happened so anyway. All of that being said there's an awful lot of information on Wikipedia and a lot of that over twenty four million articles in two hundred eighty five languages in fact and then there's stuff on there that's incredibly useful. I use wikipedia casually all time every all the probably every day it is incredibly useful. But because of what we've talked about. That's why a lot of teachers and publications like how stuff works say. You cannot use wikipedia as a source and it's because of the reasons we've listed. It's not that it's a bad thing. I actually think that Wikipedia is an amazing idea and it's actually phenomenal to me. That's worked as well as it has a rate right considering certain certain portions. The Internet can definitely derive scum and villainy you look at Youtube comments. And then you think this is the same the same world that we live in where we can go to wikipedia article about something you know something really technically advanced and get a really good understanding of it and it's this is a collaborative effort on the part of possibly hundreds of people share. And then you go to youtube and read the comments that you think. How is this the same world how what happened You know it's amazing but there are also some things that you can poke some fun at like there was A. I wish I could remember what which web comic this wasn't and listeners. If you happen to know what I'm referring to if you've been reading web comics forever and the strikes a chord let me know. I remember reading a Web comic ages ago whereas a whole series about wikipedia and and one of the things they pointed out very snarly was if you were to assume that the the the entries the have the most words are the most important to the human race then optimus prime would be more important than Abraham Lincoln. I feel like Penny Arcade. Somebody somebody please please rate until I can tell you it was not. I mean putting arcade very well may have made that same joke. Okay but I don't read pending pending arcade so I know it wasn't fitting arcade all right. Well that's fair I'm not I'm not criticizing. I don't read any web comics anymore. I just don't have the time share but I used to read a lot of them. Eric I recall seeing that that as well at any rate whoever created it somebody somebody right until all otherwise. I used to what you know. What's worse I used to have these pinned up in my cubicle. They're not up there anymore. But I used. I can't even remember but I used to have a whole bunch of them but anyway not. That's one of the things that's one of those things that you could joke about. Is that that seemingly irrelevant. Things would get a huge amount of attention. Because they were they were interesting. You know especially stuffing Geek Culture. That people are really really passionately interested in like you know which again shows you. Why they're these wikileaks. Now that exist all around these properties right right and that's perfect format for that kind of level of minutia Of of interstate entail. I mean it's ridiculous when I can look up a comic book character and see every single iteration of that comic book character and then I look up an someone who is fundamentally important in some huge moment in history and they have a fraction of that not that you couldn't cover the important contributions of that person in that amount of space you might be able to but it just gives you this weird feeling like if I were to put these scales whereas this one so heavy you know we compete is as as of January two thousand thirteen the fifth most popular website in the world behind only Google Yahoo Microsoft and facebook and in fact ahead of Amazon apple and Ebay and again. There's a lot of valuable stuff on there so I know that we definitely kind of criticized wikipedia. Quite a bit in this this podcast but keep in mind. We're talking about specifically in the use for things like academic public acedemic research. And I want to say what we do. What Jonathan I both do. I think is We'll did say already we we. We go to Wikipedia and we go straight to the resource sexual references. You take a look and see like because there you can learn more about you know..

Wikipedia Jimmy Wales editor Pippa Wales Congress Pippen United States British Petroleum BP Gulf youtube Penny Arcade Arturo Silver Jonathan Google Lauren representative Corporate Communications Depar Houston
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

08:41 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Meanwhile it's bad. Press was not particularly affecting. The growth of Wikipedia by by mid two thousand six. I think that they had five million articles. They went from. They had one million in English, but probably I million think total total. Yeah, so right right? There's a little bit of debate about well. Because I got confused, I saw one point two thousand four, they hit one million articles, and then I read later. My two thousand six hit one million articles again, and then I realized Oh wait. The first one, two thousand four was one million articles total across all languages, two thousand six was one million in English, but it was the the growth was incredible. And in two thousand seven. We have another scandal. This is when it was discovered that a wikipedia editor who is using a handle called S J e. s. s a. y. was discovered to have also created a false identity in this case. S. J had been. Posing as someone who held a PhD. In. In theology, ask him because he was saying that he was a tenured professor with an expertise in Canon law, and in reality was a twenty four year old guy who had been several colleges in Kentucky. Did Not hold a less of an expert. Perhaps yeah, but objectively speaking, he was saying that he created identity in order to give himself a buffer so that people who disagreed with him would not be able to attack him personally so in other words he was just creating a handle is just a little bit more more involved than just a handle, but here's the problem. He was also using his fake credentials to back up his arguments whenever he. He was making edits Oh. Yeah, that's that's going beyond death. Yeah, because of my expertise in this field I know that this particular thing should be worded this way rather than that way, and he didn't hold those credentials, so the New Yorker writes about Wikipedia, and they write about S J before finding out that S J is not who he claims to be. Then the information breaks that S J has actually someone else, and the New Yorker ends up. Bribing pretty strongly worded response to that and again mainstream media, blows up and online at blow up. The community begins to sift through all the edits that s j made on Wikipedia particularly in the places where he was using his false credentials to bolster his arguments. Because now the community has the responsibility to fix this, or if if in fact needs to be fixed, they have to address it so that they can again show that wikipedia is something you can rely upon at least or the at least useful rain and. Race to the ground. Yeah, it's not just a database of information you cannot really be sure is accurate or not it. was you know it was fighting a powerful? Perception problem right right right. that was also did, did you? That was also the year two thousand seven that Virtual Griffith Griffith released wicked skinner. Okay, so so so wicked scanner Was this you know a? Little program that he wrote that whenever an unregistered anonymous email at its Kapiti entry, the site logs Caesar's Ip address and and this can come in terrifically handy because you know I, it's not not all the problems are with people pretending to be who they aren't. When an anonymous user can log in and talk about anything that they want to, you know furred the kind of things we're coming out of this wicked scanner business where facts like people from Apple Ip addresses had been editing Microsoft pages on Wikipedia and vice versa right, which is another reason why we find wikipedia it's. It's one of those reasons why it's hard. Hard to trust stuff, because sometimes people with an agenda will go in and adjust a an injury, either to make one party, and look better than than it would otherwise have looked or look worse depending upon the person's agenda share. Yeah, yeah, I remember you know and Democratic Party members. Ip Address was traced to at about rush limbaugh. That were extremely unflattering. This this happened. Any election year this stuff runs rampant, sharing the where sometimes we compete will lockdown a particular page about a subject in order to avoid the crazy number of edits that different sides of debate will will put onto a page in order to support their side I mean think about it. This is kind of crazy, right. It's like if I if I have a disagreement with Lauren about a particular. And then I go to Wikipedia and edit a page, so it supports my argument. And then I cite Wikipedia as a support for my argument. That's. Very insidious. That's dirty pool. Yes, that is. An and I don't want to say that all anonymous wikipedia editors are bad or nefarious. Suffered for example, a couple of other things came out of. This is what they found out that. Someone from the CIA contributed a really long entry about lightsaber combat. Some someone from Darpa had. Fairly extensively about child booth. Stuff, it's not always bad. But we don't mean to suggest that it's always bad or that. This happens. All the time is the fact that it happens? That's the problem and you don't you know unless you are actually adept at looking at the edits page and understanding what that means, you may not be aware of something that's going on. That's not quite right and so while while the odds of that actually happening on any given page on any given day maybe low, because you're talking about lots and lots of people using this resource and lots of opportunities to fiddle with it, it does happen. That's that's why you're like you know. The odds are with you that you're going to be fine whenever you use wikipedia. Still. Eighty five thousand regular contributors and seventy seven thousand regular editors Wikipedia, as of two thousand thirteen, so and after that whole that whole problem with a dollar where the the the quote unquote the joke about him being a a suspect in the assassination of the Kennedys. Wales at instituted a new policy, saying that unregistered users can no longer post new articles at all because that was. The he wanted to head off that problem and then by registering, he hoped that that would. Create more accountability now. Of course, the S J issue showed that there were other problems and Wales came down pretty hard on that too once all the facts came out in two thousand nine. The arbitration committee had to restrict access to its site from the Church of Scientology. Ip addresses. and. Banned several anti scientologist editors because the two sides were both manipulating the same articles to either post scientology in a positive or negative light. Obviously avoid. Those around when. Anonymous I believe was involved in their campaign, so the the the the thing that was coming up into question was the neutral point of view here, and both sides were trying to use wikipedia to bolster their own arguments. And whether you side with one or the other, it was clear that both sides had agendas and. Know. Some of those people may have been trying very hard to create an objective post, but there were a lot of people who really weren't. And that's where the banning and the an Ip address blocking came in, and that same year wikipedia became licensed under creative Commons right? Yeah, yeah! which which basically just means that It's license under there. Sharon share like Yeah, so in other words you don't have to worry about. Getting chased down by lawyers using this material, and and you cannot like a person who contributes to wikipedia cannot claim that worked to be their own it all they have. They have essentially signed off right, right? It's the content. is still technically owned by the contributors, but it is freely reproducible distributable. When anyone can go in edited. Actually, that was one of those things that people worried about early on and we Kapadia this. Wait a minute. I'm an awesome writer. I write awesome things, my serve credit for my awesome thing, or even if I don't get credit, I certainly shouldn't be subjected to seeing other. Coming in editing, my awesome prosed. where I wrote this amazing. Piece on optimus prime in his importance to western culture, and some idiot came in and said that he turned into this model of of a semi truck..

Wikipedia Griffith Griffith Church of Scientology Darpa CIA Kapiti Wales Democratic Party S. J Apple Kapadia S J professor Kentucky Lauren writer
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

14:26 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Do you have anything between two thousand three and two thousand five because otherwise I'm just GonNa skip right on the head. I believe that in two thousand and four wikipedia was founded on which is which is the for profit kind of branch of Wikipedia that that maintains a whole bunch of entertainment mostly related with I think I think that the the wikipedia is among them stuff like that. Okay and you know. Those are the WIKKI that I've recently become more and more familiar with because pretty much any kind of entertainment thing out there has its own wiki. The point where I'm like. I can't believe this has a Wiki. I can't believe textile doesn't anyway because these these are ad supported however they're still community run and you know yeah right right so so similar but again the following moral on the wiki lines of philosophy rather than the wikipedia one because again the one of the things sanger also said in his in his talks or in his writings whereas that You Know He. He saw the WIKI. Philosophy was kind of counter to that of an encyclopedia. Like the to do not deny a very very seamless way and that That that was a concern to him but that he felt that because we can pedia was specifically supposed to be an encyclopedia. It helped guide the policies for better for worse. So it's the community on. Wikipedia is not exactly the same as what you would find on your average wicky. The the process is slightly different because it has a very specific purpose to be an encyclopedia in two thousand five wired published a report that said that The Jimmy Wales had done something. That's generally frowned upon within the wikipedia community. And that is to edit your own page eighteen times. Apparently and supposedly the edits that were made were removing things like like sanders involvement in the early Genesis Wikipedia. Essentially there was There was charged that Wales had removed sentence that had referred to Sanger Co founder of pedia. And then there were other things. Well that's that Wales said was. It was just an attempt to remove some inaccuracies. Wasn't he wasn't trained. Washing anything are cleaning it out. He was saying anyway. Defense this by the way right in general that that's considered bad form on wikipedia. It's it's not explicitly against the rules. Not you're generally I mean you're you're generally if if you find it inaccuracy about something that concerns you Due to an end date to have an acronym for all it is the conflict of interest that that yeah that you're supposed to submit it to an editor who can then make a non conflict of interest judgment call about whether or not that it needs to be made. It's interesting that particular sequence is going to play an important part towards the end of this timeline conversation because it turns out some people have taken advantage of that particular approach to the point where they have been able to insert misleading information or at least legal important truth in the process of quote unquote correcting or right adding to an article. So we'll get to that in a moment so Wales ends up getting some heat for this even though two day. He says that you know it wasn't it was not a big deal. It doesn't even say he didn't do anything wrong he's like. I don't understand what the big deal is here right race fixing errors. He's he's like he I did it. There was nothing wrong with what I do. So calm down. But then other people say well if you had just gone through the regular channels than it would have been a story May of two thousand five was when we had An anonymous user who was later identified. But I'm not going to say the name here but he. He posted comments in an article about siegenthaler. John Similar saying that he was a suspect in the assassination of both John and Robert Kennedy dollar as a journalist and was a friend to Robert Kennedy actually one of Palmer's so seeing Dolor said that this amounted to internet character. Assassination at the comments were a hoax. It was supposed to be a joke although I don't know who would find this particularly. Yeah but the hoax. It was made in. May but it wasn't discovered until September of two thousand and five and then the mainstream media cut hold the story and began to cover it and this ended up being a big black eye on wikipedia because everyone ran with the story saying how can you trust a resource that anyone can go into and change in vandalize or create a hoax. Like this ready to joke. Insert completely false information or delete something so that whatever is left is not an accurate portrayal of the actual subject pro The entire site. That's useless yeah. Media was kind of ripon right. It definitely escalated to from Hayes. Sometimes you can't trust what's on Wikipedia to Wikipedia is bad because people are evil. They will mislead you. And by the way I don't really think either extreme as healthy while I often will dismiss wikipedia in any sort of academic approach. I am not WanNa stay fits all the time. There's some things well. We competed that. I find genuinely amusing. And there's some things I find genuinely helpful but but yeah I would never go so far on either side now so April two thousand six. We have another scandal guy from Glasgow whose name I will not be able to say Allen MC mcilwraith the kill Rafe. It's got to be in front of me that sounds that sounds share. Mc L. W. R. A. H. mcilwraith So He created a wikipedia entry about himself that portrayed him as a decorated army officers. Something that he was not And AGAIN. The mainstream media picked up on this and said look. Here's a guy who's promoting himself created a false identity for himself and and the shows that you can't trust what's on Wikipedia. Meanwhile it's bad press was not particularly affecting the growth of Wikipedia by By mid two thousand six I think that they had five million articles they went from. They had one million in English. But probably I million think total total. Yeah so right right. There's a little bit of debate about well. Because I got confused. I saw at one point in two thousand four. They hit one million articles and then I read later. My two thousand six hundred one million articles again and then. I realized Oh wait the first one. Two thousand four was one million articles total across all languages. Two thousand six was one million in English but it was the the growth was incredible and in two thousand seven. We have another scandal. This is when it was discovered that a wikipedia editor who is using a handle called S. J. E. S. S. J. A. Y. Was discovered to have also created a false identity in this case. Sj had been posing as someone who held a PhD in in theology. Ask Him because he was saying that he was a tenured. Professor with an expertise in Canon law and in reality was a twenty four year. Old Guy who had been several colleges in Kentucky did not hold a less of an expert. Perhaps yeah but objectively speaking. He was saying that he created identity in order to give himself a buffer. So that people who disagreed with him would not be able to attack him personally so in other words he was just creating a handle is just a little bit more More involved than just a handle. But here's the problem. He was also using his fake credentials to back up his arguments whenever he was making edits. Oh yeah that's that's going beyond death. Yeah because of my expertise in this field. I know that this particular thing should be worded this way rather than that way. And he didn't hold those credentials so the New Yorker writes about wikipedia and they write about sj before finding out that S J is not who he claims to be. Then the information brakes that S J is actually someone else and the New Yorker ends up. Bribing pretty strongly worded response to that and again mainstream media blows up and online at blow up. The community begins to sift through all the edits that s j made on wikipedia particularly in the places where he was using his false credentials to bolster his arguments because now the community has the responsibility to fix this or if if in fact needs to be fixed they have to address it so that they can again show. That wikipedia is something you can rely upon at least or the at least useful rain and not just to the ground. Yeah it's not just a database of information you cannot really be sure is accurate or not It was you know it was fighting a powerful perception problem. Right right right That was also did did you? That was also the year two thousand seven that Virtual Griffith Griffith released wicked skinner. Okay so so so. Wicked scanner Was this you know a little program that he wrote that Whenever an unregistered anonymous user at its Kapiti entry the site logs Caesar's Ip address And and this can come in terrifically handy because you know I. It's not not all the problems are with people pretending to be who they aren't when an anonymous user can log in and talk about anything that they want to you know for the kind of things. We're coming out of this wicked scanner. Business where facts like people from Apple. Ip addresses had been editing Microsoft pages on Wikipedia and vice versa. Right which is another reason why we find wikipedia. It's it's one of those reasons why it's hard to trust stuff because sometimes people with an agenda will go in and adjust a An injury either to make one party and look better than than it would otherwise have looked or look worse depending upon the person's agenda share. Yeah Yeah I remember you know and Democratic Party members. Ip Address was traced to at about rush limbaugh. That were extremely unflattering. This this happened any election year. This stuff runs rampant sharing the where. Sometimes we competed will lock down a particular page about a subject in order to avoid the crazy number of edits that different sides of debate will will put onto a page in order to support their side. I mean think about it. This is kind of crazy right. It's like if I if I have a disagreement with Lauren about a particular and then I go to wikipedia and edit a page so it supports my argument and then I cite Wikipedia as a support for my argument. That's very insidious that's dirty pool. Yes that is an and I don't want to say that. All anonymous wikipedia editors are bad or doing nefarious offered for example. A couple of other things came out of this is what they found out that someone from the CIA contributed a really long entry about lightsaber combat. Some someone from Darpa had written fairly extensively about Sheila booth stuff. It's not always bad but we don't mean to suggest that it's always bad or that. This happens all the time is the fact that it happens. That's the problem and you don't you know unless you are actually adept at looking at the edits page and understanding what that means. You may not be aware of something that's going on. That's not quite right and so While while the odds of that actually happening on any given page on any given day maybe low. Because you're talking about lots and lots of people using this resource and lots of opportunities to fiddle with it. It does happen. That's that's why you're like you know. The odds are with you that you're going to be fine whenever you use. Wikipedia still eighty five thousand regular contributors and seventy seven thousand regular editors Wikipedia as twenty thirteen. So and after that whole that whole problem with a dollar where the the the quote unquote the joke about him being a a suspect in the assassination of the Kennedys Wales had instituted a new policy saying that unregistered users can no longer post new articles at all because that was the he wanted to head off that problem and then by registering. He hoped that that would create more accountability. Now of course the S J issue showed that there were other problems and Wales came down pretty hard on that too once. All the facts came out in two thousand nine. The arbitration committee had to restrict access to its site from the Church of Scientology Ip addresses and also banned. Several anti scientologist editors because the two sides were both manipulating the same articles to either post scientology in a positive or negative light. Obviously avoid those around. When anonymous I believe was involved in their campaign so the the the the thing that was coming up into question was the neutral point of view here and both sides were trying to use wikipedia to bolster their own arguments. And whether you side with one or the other it was clear that both sides had agendas and you know some of those people may have been trying very hard to create an objective post but there were a lot of people who really weren't and that's where the banning and the an Ip address blocking came in and that same year wikipedia became licensed under creative Commons right. Yeah yeah which which basically just means that It's license under there Sharon share like Yeah so in other words..

Wikipedia Wales pedia Jimmy Wales editor Sj sanger Griffith Griffith Mc L. W. R. A. H. mcilwraith sanders Glasgow Apple CIA ripon Kentucky Hayes Darpa
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

07:21 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Do you have anything between two thousand, three and two thousand five, because otherwise I'm just gonNA. Skip right on the head I believe that in two thousand and four wikipedia was founded on which is which is the for profit kind of branch of wikipedia that that maintains a whole bunch of entertainment, mostly related with I. Think I think that the the wikipedia is among them stuff like that okay, and you know those are the Wikki that I've recently become more and more familiar with because. Pretty much any kind of entertainment thing out. There has its own wiki. The point where I'm like I can't believe this has a Wiki. I can't believe textile doesn't anyway. Because and these these are ad supported. However, they're still community, run and. You know yeah right right so so similar, but again the following moral on the wiki lines of. Philosophy rather than the wikipedia one because again, the one of the things sanger also said in his in his talks or in his writings whereas that You know he he saw the wiki philosophy was kind of. Counter to that of an encyclopedia like the to do not deny. A very very seamless way, and that that that was a concern to him, but that he felt that because we can pedia was specifically supposed to be an encyclopedia, it helped guide the policies. For better or for worse, so it's the community on Wikipedia is not exactly the same as what you would find on your average wicky. The! The process is slightly different, because it has a very specific purpose to be an encyclopedia. In two thousand five wired published a report that said that the Jimmy Wales had done. Something is generally frowned upon within the Wikipedia community, and that is to edit your own page eighteen times apparently. And supposedly the edits that were made were removing things like like sanders. Involvement in the early Genesis Wikipedia. Essentially there was there was charged that Wales had removed sentence that had referred to Sanger Co founder of pedia. And then there were other things well. That's that Wales said was it was just an attempt to remove some inaccuracies? It wasn't he wasn't trained. Washing anything are cleaning it out. He was saying anyway. Defense this by the way right in general that that's considered. Bad Form on Wikipedia it's it's not. Explicitly against the rules. Not. You're generally I mean you're. You're generally if if you find it inaccuracy about something that concerns, you due to an end date to have an acronym for all. It is the conflict of interest. That that yeah that you're supposed to submit it to an editor, who can then make a non conflict of interest judgment, call about whether or not that it needs to be made. It's interesting that particular sequence is going to play an important part towards the end of this timeline conversation because it turns out. Some people have taken advantage of that particular approach. To the point where they have been able to insert misleading information or at least. League important truths. in the process of quote, correcting or right adding to an article, so we'll get to that in a moment. So Wales ends up getting some heat for this. Even though to day. He says that you know wasn't. It was not a big deal. It doesn't even say he didn't do anything wrong. He's like I don't understand what the big deal is here. Right fixing errors he's he's like he I did it. There was nothing wrong with the idea so calm down, but then other people say well. If you had just gone through the regular channels than it would have been a story. May of two thousand five was when we had an anonymous user who was later identified, but I'm not going to say the name here, but he. He posted comments in an article about. Siegenthaler John Similar saying that. He was a suspect in the assassination of both John and Robert Kennedy. Dollar as a journalist and was a friend to Robert, the actually one of Palmeiras. So seeing color. said that this amounted to Internet character assassination. At the comments were a hoax. It was supposed to be a joke, although I don't know who would find this particularly. Yeah, but the hoax was made in May, but it wasn't discovered until September of two thousand and five, and then the mainstream media cut hold the story and began to cover it and this. Ended up being a big black eye on Wikipedia, because everyone ran with the story saying how can you trust a resource that anyone can go into and change in vandalize or create a hoax like to joke? Insert completely false information or delete something so that whatever is left is not an accurate portrayal of the actual subject. Per the entire site, it's useless, yeah. Media was kind of ripon right. It definitely escalated to from Hayes sometimes. You can't trust what's on Wikipedia to. WIKIPEDIA is bad. Because people are evil, they will mislead you. And by the way I don't really think either. Extreme is healthy. While I often will dismiss Wikipedia in any sort of academic approach. I am not WanNa to stay fits all. The time. There's some things well. We competed that I. Find Genuinely Amusing, and there's some things I find genuinely helpful, but but yeah I would never go so far on either side now. So April two thousand six. We have another scandal. Guy. From Glasgow. Whose name I will not be able to say Allen MC mcilwraith, the kill Rafe. It's got to be killed. In front of me, that sounds that sounds. Share MCI L. W. R. A.. H. McGill mcilwraith so he created a wikipedia entry about himself. That portrayed him as a decorated army officers something that he was not and Again the mainstream media picked up on this and said look. Here's a guy who's promoting himself. Created a false identity a for himself, and and the shows that you can't trust what's on Wikipedia. Meanwhile it's bad. Press was not particularly affecting. The growth of Wikipedia by by mid two thousand six. I think that they had five million articles. They went from. They had one million in English, but probably I million think total total. Yeah, so right right? There's a little bit of debate about well. Because I got confused, I saw one point two thousand four, they hit one million articles, and then I read later. My two thousand six hit one million articles again, and then I realized Oh wait. The first one, two thousand four was one million articles total across all languages, two thousand six was one million in English, but it was the the growth was incredible. And in two thousand seven..

wikipedia Wales pedia Jimmy Wales sanger sanders Robert Kennedy Glasgow John Sanger Co editor ripon Hayes Allen MC mcilwraith founder Palmeiras L. W. Rafe
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

07:21 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"Do you have anything between two thousand, three and two thousand five, because otherwise I'm just gonNA. Skip right on the head I believe that in two thousand and four wikipedia was founded on which is which is the for profit kind of branch of wikipedia that that maintains a whole bunch of entertainment, mostly related with I. Think I think that the the wikipedia is among them stuff like that okay, and you know those are the Wikki that I've recently become more and more familiar with because. Pretty much any kind of entertainment thing out. There has its own wiki. The point where I'm like I can't believe this has a Wiki. I can't believe textile doesn't anyway. Because and these these are ad supported. However, they're still community, run and. You know yeah right right so so similar, but again the following moral on the wiki lines of. Philosophy rather than the wikipedia one because again, the one of the things sanger also said in his in his talks or in his writings whereas that You know he he saw the wiki philosophy was kind of. Counter to that of an encyclopedia like the to do not deny. A very very seamless way, and that that that was a concern to him, but that he felt that because we can pedia was specifically supposed to be an encyclopedia, it helped guide the policies. For better or for worse, so it's the community on Wikipedia is not exactly the same as what you would find on your average wicky. The! The process is slightly different, because it has a very specific purpose to be an encyclopedia. In two thousand five wired published a report that said that the Jimmy Wales had done. Something is generally frowned upon within the Wikipedia community, and that is to edit your own page eighteen times apparently. And supposedly the edits that were made were removing things like like sanders. Involvement in the early Genesis Wikipedia. Essentially there was there was charged that Wales had removed sentence that had referred to Sanger Co founder of pedia. And then there were other things well. That's that Wales said was it was just an attempt to remove some inaccuracies? It wasn't he wasn't trained. Washing anything are cleaning it out. He was saying anyway. Defense this by the way right in general that that's considered. Bad Form on Wikipedia it's it's not. Explicitly against the rules. Not. You're generally I mean you're. You're generally if if you find it inaccuracy about something that concerns, you due to an end date to have an acronym for all. It is the conflict of interest. That that yeah that you're supposed to submit it to an editor, who can then make a non conflict of interest judgment, call about whether or not that it needs to be made. It's interesting that particular sequence is going to play an important part towards the end of this timeline conversation because it turns out. Some people have taken advantage of that particular approach. To the point where they have been able to insert misleading information or at least. League important truths. in the process of quote, correcting or right adding to an article, so we'll get to that in a moment. So Wales ends up getting some heat for this. Even though to day. He says that you know wasn't. It was not a big deal. It doesn't even say he didn't do anything wrong. He's like I don't understand what the big deal is here. Right fixing errors he's he's like he I did it. There was nothing wrong with the idea so calm down, but then other people say well. If you had just gone through the regular channels than it would have been a story. May of two thousand five was when we had an anonymous user who was later identified, but I'm not going to say the name here, but he. He posted comments in an article about. Siegenthaler John Similar saying that. He was a suspect in the assassination of both John and Robert Kennedy. Dollar as a journalist and was a friend to Robert, the actually one of Palmeiras. So seeing color. said that this amounted to Internet character assassination. At the comments were a hoax. It was supposed to be a joke, although I don't know who would find this particularly. Yeah, but the hoax was made in May, but it wasn't discovered until September of two thousand and five, and then the mainstream media cut hold the story and began to cover it and this. Ended up being a big black eye on Wikipedia, because everyone ran with the story saying how can you trust a resource that anyone can go into and change in vandalize or create a hoax like to joke? Insert completely false information or delete something so that whatever is left is not an accurate portrayal of the actual subject. Per the entire site, it's useless, yeah. Media was kind of ripon right. It definitely escalated to from Hayes sometimes. You can't trust what's on Wikipedia to. WIKIPEDIA is bad. Because people are evil, they will mislead you. And by the way I don't really think either. Extreme is healthy. While I often will dismiss Wikipedia in any sort of academic approach. I am not WanNa to stay fits all. The time. There's some things well. We competed that I. Find Genuinely Amusing, and there's some things I find genuinely helpful, but but yeah I would never go so far on either side now. So April two thousand six. We have another scandal. Guy. From Glasgow. Whose name I will not be able to say Allen MC mcilwraith, the kill Rafe. It's got to be killed. In front of me, that sounds that sounds. Share MCI L. W. R. A.. H. McGill mcilwraith so he created a wikipedia entry about himself. That portrayed him as a decorated army officers something that he was not and Again the mainstream media picked up on this and said look. Here's a guy who's promoting himself. Created a false identity a for himself, and and the shows that you can't trust what's on Wikipedia. Meanwhile it's bad. Press was not particularly affecting. The growth of Wikipedia by by mid two thousand six. I think that they had five million articles. They went from. They had one million in English, but probably I million think total total. Yeah, so right right? There's a little bit of debate about well. Because I got confused, I saw one point two thousand four, they hit one million articles, and then I read later. My two thousand six hit one million articles again, and then I realized Oh wait. The first one, two thousand four was one million articles total across all languages, two thousand six was one million in English, but it was the the growth was incredible. And in two thousand seven..

wikipedia Wales pedia Jimmy Wales sanger sanders Robert Kennedy Glasgow John Sanger Co editor ripon Hayes Allen MC mcilwraith founder Palmeiras L. W. Rafe
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

04:35 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"In the summer of Well. One of the. Summer two thousand one thing singer did note. was that even in those early days that he was starting to notice that people who were? Difficult and who were persistent? Were sometimes irritating very valuable members of the wikipedia community and the valuable members were like. I don't need this. I'd never mind I'm a volunteer. And they just left and then so that meant that you started to have more of the persistent difficult type and fewer of the valuable expert types. And Singer saw that another downfall of wikipedia and there there wasn't really any way to counteract that. Without essentially violating kind of those philosophies that wikipedia was founded upon right, and you know one of those philosophies is definitely the that editors and contributors should be polite to each other, which happens sometimes. Yeah exactly you know it's human error. The the vast majority. I think the vast majority of people who are regular contributors to Wikipedia are. In general very courteous, but all it takes are a few trolls to really stir things up and and trolls who are particularly effective, can cause huge amounts of frustration in the community. And in fact, that's why they do it. With a little effort they make a big impact and boy. We did a whole episode on trees where it was a great when you guys should go back and listen to that one, but in summer of two thousand and one someone ended up using the editing tools to vandalize the front page of Wikipedia, because that was one of the ones you could edit back in those days and and so they vandalized it, and then someone tried to archive the vandalized page so stanger when ended deleted the archives, so then they kind of reposted the archive somewhere else and Sanger went in a deleted that, and this became a big kerfuffle between Sanger and the community, the community, not the entire community, but there were sections of the community that said. You are overstepping your balance. This is not yours to do this with your using power Howard. The fact that you have the ability to do that doesn't mean that you are only that you should do that like you are capable of doing that, but you should not do it and Sanger was like this is kind of silly. The whole point of this is that we don't want the vandalize version of Wikipedia to be a representation, of Wikipedia, we don't want that to come up in search because it hurts the community, I don't see where the problem is. And others were saying no, no, no, that's beside the point. It matter what the content is the matter. The matter is that you've graded it. If you start deleting than where does it end right? You've bypassed the whole process. And by bypassing rendered the process meaning less than it went from kerfuffle to Shenanigans, well in in two thousand and two February, two thousand two sanger is laid off of Wikipedia. At that point the DOT com bubble bursting had really started to take its effect. New pedia essentially was was petering out of that point, and and at first sanger. Has had his salary reduced couple times I think, and then he was laid off, continued to work in a volunteer capacity for a little while, also in February, two thousand and two Spanish language version of Wikipedia fort off of the main version, and became Encyclopedia Libra, and the reason for the split was that the the people working on the Spanish side were worried that there was going to be problems with censorship. Sanger deleting stuff, and also there was worry that wikipedia would soon start to institute advertising on its site to monetize wikipedia and that there's worry there that by monitoring wikipedia you would compromise the integrity share, which is something that Sanger was saying didn't exist because of the lack of peer review, so it's kind of interesting like you're GonNa ruin. The integrity of the same thing is like what integrity. So that was an interesting discussion and in August. Two Thousand Two Jimmy Wales said. That we competed would never run ads on its site. And in fact, that's also when wikipedia dot com became wikipedia dot org, as an an example of this is this is we are not. WE'RE NOT A. Company yeah we're an organization..

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

05:46 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"You read stuff you see and I mean there's there's love rancor on both parts race lately. SANGER has a lot to say about the direction that Wikipedia took, and and it's pretty clear that he feels that. It's not ideal I mean he doesn't outright. Come out and say that this is It's it's useless or like that, but he has a lot of criticisms. Meanwhile the Wikipedia community intern has a lot of criticisms that they direct who singer and they both both sides have relevant points, so even though I'm talking a lot about sanger's mainly because that's that's the account I went with. For. Years Yeah. It's not that not that I necessarily side one hundred percent saying. I'm not that far to that extreme Anyway a lot of the the. Policies of Wikipedia actually came out of the community. It became sort of communal decisions of how the sites should work, which was kind of interesting, because they had originally thought of it being of again an extension of new pedia, but this became more of the communal approach to the Internet, which again is more of the Tim Burners Lee approach share, which makes it a lot harder to direct you. Can't you know when a group of? People who have all decided. They want to go left. It's really hard to make them go right. You know when you're one guy. Yeah, yeah, and you know there's there's voting systems in place. Know even even back in those days there were a lot of a lot of ways for people to communicate with each other these ideas that they had for the community. A they decided that that we appeal content would always remain free for others to read and edit. Meaning there would never be a point where there'd be a paywall or subscription for wikipedia and. They also you know, we're putting in those policies that allow people to publish rough drafts or rough ideas that could be polished over time, either by themselves, or by other people, and then Google started to include Wikipedia, and its search results for different topics, which that there was suddenly a huge rush of. People yeah, and Sanger notice as more people were coming to visit wikipedia more than we're getting involved as editors and contributors, so that meant that even that as the wikipedia traffic was increasing, so was the content you were suddenly seeing even faster growth as far as how much information was being contained within wikipedia. In the summer of Well. One of the. Summer two thousand one thing singer did note. was that even in those early days that he was starting to notice that people who were? Difficult and who were persistent? Were sometimes irritating very valuable members of the wikipedia community and the valuable members were like. I don't need this. I'd never mind I'm a volunteer. And they just left and then so that meant that you started to have more of the persistent difficult type and fewer of the valuable expert types. And Singer saw that another downfall of wikipedia and there there wasn't really any way to counteract that. Without essentially violating kind of those philosophies that wikipedia was founded upon right, and you know one of those philosophies is definitely the that editors and contributors should be polite to each other, which happens sometimes. Yeah exactly you know it's human error. The the vast majority. I think the vast majority of people who are regular contributors to Wikipedia are. In general very courteous, but all it takes are a few trolls to really stir things up and and trolls who are particularly effective, can cause huge amounts of frustration in the community. And in fact, that's why they do it. With a little effort they make a big impact and boy. We did a whole episode on trees where it was a great when you guys should go back and listen to that one, but in summer of two thousand and one someone ended up using the editing tools to vandalize the front page of Wikipedia, because that was one of the ones you could edit back in those days and and so they vandalized it, and then someone tried to archive the vandalized page so stanger when ended deleted the archives, so then they kind of reposted the archive somewhere else and Sanger went in a deleted that, and this became a big kerfuffle between Sanger and the community, the community, not the entire community, but there were sections of the community that said. You are overstepping your balance. This is not yours to do this with your using power Howard. The fact that you have the ability to do that doesn't mean that you are only that you should do that like you are capable of doing that, but you should not do it and Sanger was like this is kind of silly. The whole point of this is that we don't want the vandalize version of Wikipedia to be a representation, of Wikipedia, we don't want that to come up in search because it hurts the community, I don't see where the problem is. And others were saying no, no, no, that's beside the point. It matter what the content is the matter. The matter is that you've graded it. If you start deleting than where does it end right? You've bypassed the whole process. And by bypassing rendered the process meaning less than it went from kerfuffle to Shenanigans, well in in two thousand and two February, two thousand two sanger is laid off of Wikipedia. At that point the DOT com bubble bursting had really started to take its effect. New pedia essentially was was petering out of that point, and and at first sanger. Has had his salary reduced couple times I think, and.

Wikipedia sanger SANGER intern Tim Burners Lee Google Howard stanger
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

02:36 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"You read stuff you see and I mean there's there's love rancor on both parts race lately. SANGER has a lot to say about the direction that Wikipedia took, and and it's pretty clear that he feels that. It's not ideal I mean he doesn't outright. Come out and say that this is It's it's useless or like that, but he has a lot of criticisms. Meanwhile the Wikipedia community intern has a lot of criticisms that they direct who singer and they both both sides have relevant points, so even though I'm talking a lot about sanger's mainly because that's that's the account I went with. For. Years Yeah. It's not that not that I necessarily side one hundred percent saying. I'm not that far to that extreme Anyway a lot of the the. Policies of Wikipedia actually came out of the community. It became sort of communal decisions of how the sites should work, which was kind of interesting, because they had originally thought of it being of again an extension of new pedia, but this became more of the communal approach to the Internet, which again is more of the Tim Burners Lee approach share, which makes it a lot harder to direct you. Can't you know when a group of? People who have all decided. They want to go left. It's really hard to make them go right. You know when you're one guy. Yeah, yeah, and you know there's there's voting systems in place. Know even even back in those days there were a lot of a lot of ways for people to communicate with each other these ideas that they had for the community. A they decided that that we appeal content would always remain free for others to read and edit. Meaning there would never be a point where there'd be a paywall or subscription for wikipedia and. They also you know, we're putting in those policies that allow people to publish rough drafts or rough ideas that could be polished over time, either by themselves, or by other people, and then Google started to include Wikipedia, and its search results for different topics, which that there was suddenly a huge rush of. People yeah, and Sanger notice as more people were coming to visit wikipedia more than we're getting involved as editors and contributors, so that meant that even that as the wikipedia traffic was increasing, so was the content you were suddenly seeing even faster growth as far as how much information was being contained within wikipedia. In the summer of Well. One of the. Summer two thousand one thing singer did note. was that even in those early days.

Wikipedia Sanger SANGER Tim Burners Lee intern Google
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

05:45 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"One ninety nine comes up with his version, his idea for a free collaborative encyclopedia and he taps the guy named Larry Sanger to be project lead for this new encyclopedia. Now he knew. Sanger from mailing lists 'cause. This isn't that long after the fact that people were just using things like usenet and mailing lists, and said of the web and and so he he got in touch with Sanger and and convinced. Sanger to head up a project. This collaborative encyclopedia, which at that point did not have a name right right? Yeah, they have been thinking. I've read about open source software, and and how open source culture could also be thing and a beautiful thing and so. That was kind of when you look back at Timbers Lee. Who's The guy who essentially created what we know of as the web? That was sort of his approach to. He thought that open was the right way to go that the open collaborative way would mean that the Internet becomes the world's tool, not any one. Company or governments tool share and so. This was sort of the idea of of. Let's make an encyclopedia that follows those same kind of philosophies. Yeah, and so so Wales and Sanger, and a few others start to form a project that they call new pedia in the U. P.. A. And this was a peer reviewed encyclopedia that they were going to put online, and and you know because they wanted that they weren't that expert opinion to come in, and they wanted everything to be as as factual and reliable as possible. In fact singer that was he was passionate about this. He said that you could create an online encyclopedia where everyone just contributes, but if you want it to be a reliable resource, you need that, peer review step in their saying it turned, and it turned out to be extremely slow to to get people to submit anything at all because it was, it was intimidating and be to find the correct expert to to look it over, and also the the review process was a singer would describe later laborious. So two thousand is when new pedia starts and starts in the middle of two thousand or so. and. They had an. Board of sort of a peer. Review Board made up of PhD volunteers. These are people who are not even being paid. They're volunteering their expertise to review papers to make sure that they are. They're ready for publication. So this is like. If you were to submit a paper to an academic journal, write or a scientific, Journal something that. It's not just automatically GONNA get published. It has to be reviewed and pass review. There might be a lengthy revision process before we'll publish, so there were seven steps in this review process for new pedia and they did. They didn't think that it would work i. read somewhere that whales really thought that you know. I had been in conversations with people on the Internet and had realized that if it's something that they feel passionate about, they're usually really willing to engage in that conversation. Conversation and to help, so the idea was that you know you get people who are really smart. A lot of really smart people enjoy spreading knowledge that we would know anything about wanting to show off knowledge. Yeah, I'm not really smart, but I still like to do it so I mean that's why I play. Trivia is really just show off how smart I am, but I know that compared to these people I was and still am stupid, but anyway so or at least. Different way anyway, thank you cut. Everyone's special and nobody is. So yeah, seven step process to publish to review before you would publish an article. It turned out that this was a bit of a bottleneck. And the very first new pedia article that was ever published was written by Kristof husked, and it was about eight tonality, and it was published in the summer of two thousand, so it was early two thousand when they started working on new pedia. At that time, the entire submission and review process was all through mailing lists. It was there wasn't a web based version yet and so the first article published in the summer of two thousand. It was either June or July, according to Sanger. Who wrote about this? I found it on slash dot. He wrote a two part piece that was essentially about the whole beginning of wikipedia. which started with this new pedia thing? Well in January two, thousand one, Sanger and Wales meet up with a guy named Ben Kovic at the infamous, Taco stand meeting tacos Dan Meeting. They were in California and they were at a TACO stand. They started talking. codes told Wales and sanger about Cunningham's wicky wicky web platform, and they thought about this as being a tool that would allow for collaborative work and make it much easier to get articles and Sanger was still thinking about this review process. They were thinking that in order to get more submissions in order to make it a little bit less intimidating for people to to to submit an article to this crazy peer review thing to say like. Don't worry so much about the quality just amid stuff because it turned out that. The one of the things they were worried about was that they needed to have content and part of the philosophy was that if we can fix content if the contents not perfect, we can still edit at once. We get it, but if we never get any content, raised no encyclopedia. Because I think at the time they had they had maybe twenty articles i. mean something know a very low number? Yeah, it wasn't. It was. It was twenty five articles by the winter of two thousand one so summer two thousand..

Larry Sanger Sanger Wales Timbers Lee Kristof husked California wikipedia. Ben Kovic Cunningham
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

05:45 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"One ninety nine comes up with his version, his idea for a free collaborative encyclopedia and he taps the guy named Larry Sanger to be project lead for this new encyclopedia. Now he knew. Sanger from mailing lists 'cause. This isn't that long after the fact that people were just using things like usenet and mailing lists, and said of the web and and so he he got in touch with Sanger and and convinced. Sanger to head up a project. This collaborative encyclopedia, which at that point did not have a name right right? Yeah, they have been thinking. I've read about open source software, and and how open source culture could also be thing and a beautiful thing and so. That was kind of when you look back at Timbers Lee. Who's The guy who essentially created what we know of as the web? That was sort of his approach to. He thought that open was the right way to go that the open collaborative way would mean that the Internet becomes the world's tool, not any one. Company or governments tool share and so. This was sort of the idea of of. Let's make an encyclopedia that follows those same kind of philosophies. Yeah, and so so Wales and Sanger, and a few others start to form a project that they call new pedia in the U. P.. A. And this was a peer reviewed encyclopedia that they were going to put online, and and you know because they wanted that they weren't that expert opinion to come in, and they wanted everything to be as as factual and reliable as possible. In fact singer that was he was passionate about this. He said that you could create an online encyclopedia where everyone just contributes, but if you want it to be a reliable resource, you need that, peer review step in their saying it turned, and it turned out to be extremely slow to to get people to submit anything at all because it was, it was intimidating and be to find the correct expert to to look it over, and also the the review process was a singer would describe later laborious. So two thousand is when new pedia starts and starts in the middle of two thousand or so. and. They had an. Board of sort of a peer. Review Board made up of PhD volunteers. These are people who are not even being paid. They're volunteering their expertise to review papers to make sure that they are. They're ready for publication. So this is like. If you were to submit a paper to an academic journal, write or a scientific, Journal something that. It's not just automatically GONNA get published. It has to be reviewed and pass review. There might be a lengthy revision process before we'll publish, so there were seven steps in this review process for new pedia and they did. They didn't think that it would work i. read somewhere that whales really thought that you know. I had been in conversations with people on the Internet and had realized that if it's something that they feel passionate about, they're usually really willing to engage in that conversation. Conversation and to help, so the idea was that you know you get people who are really smart. A lot of really smart people enjoy spreading knowledge that we would know anything about wanting to show off knowledge. Yeah, I'm not really smart, but I still like to do it so I mean that's why I play. Trivia is really just show off how smart I am, but I know that compared to these people I was and still am stupid, but anyway so or at least. Different way anyway, thank you cut. Everyone's special and nobody is. So yeah, seven step process to publish to review before you would publish an article. It turned out that this was a bit of a bottleneck. And the very first new pedia article that was ever published was written by Kristof husked, and it was about eight tonality, and it was published in the summer of two thousand, so it was early two thousand when they started working on new pedia. At that time, the entire submission and review process was all through mailing lists. It was there wasn't a web based version yet and so the first article published in the summer of two thousand. It was either June or July, according to Sanger. Who wrote about this? I found it on slash dot. He wrote a two part piece that was essentially about the whole beginning of wikipedia. which started with this new pedia thing? Well in January two, thousand one, Sanger and Wales meet up with a guy named Ben Kovic at the infamous, Taco stand meeting tacos Dan Meeting. They were in California and they were at a TACO stand. They started talking. codes told Wales and sanger about Cunningham's wicky wicky web platform, and they thought about this as being a tool that would allow for collaborative work and make it much easier to get articles and Sanger was still thinking about this review process. They were thinking that in order to get more submissions in order to make it a little bit less intimidating for people to to to submit an article to this crazy peer review thing to say like. Don't worry so much about the quality just amid stuff because it turned out that. The one of the things they were worried about was that they needed to have content and part of the philosophy was that if we can fix content if the contents not perfect, we can still edit at once. We get it, but if we never get any content, raised no encyclopedia. Because I think at the time they had they had maybe twenty articles i. mean something know a very low number? Yeah, it wasn't. It was. It was twenty five articles by the winter of two thousand one so summer two thousand..

Larry Sanger Sanger Wales Timbers Lee Kristof husked California wikipedia. Ben Kovic Cunningham
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

07:48 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"About the writing level, yeah, juncture right, but but I used to write these these long articles and one of the policies and how stuff works. Is that you do not use compe- as a source. And I used to be an editor before I was a podcast and social media person, and yes, that was one of the things that we very firmly enforced. are still do and really the reason for that has nothing to do with whether or not the well it. Something to do with whether or not the information you find on Wikipedia is reliable, but more importantly, wikipedia is a dynamic thing right? It can be written and edited by anybody at any time, and so when you sit there and site something from Wikipedia, it may be the next time someone visits that particular entry the the. Information has changed, and it may be that the information now is where accurate than it was or maybe less accurate at any rate, the things that make wikipedia a useful tool in day to day I need to get this information are the same things that make it a dangerous tool right if you are writing in any sort of academe IQ or professional. Yeah thank you editor for the word that I don't have. But, really before we get into all the pros and cons are just on. Let's talk about the history so before there was a wikipedia back when there was just barely a web. Yeah, yeah, it was more more local networks of computers and some of them. Could you know key and other local networks? We did have an Internet. And Web was a thing, but it was very young, but back in hundred ninety three. So you know the web essentially is introduced ninety two right right ninety three, so webb has not been around for very long. Rick Gates comes up with this idea, he says. You know what would be really super awesome if if we were to build an encyclopedia that lived on the Internet and if you made that encyclopedias something that anyone could contribute to so that way you can tap into the world's knowledge and people who are really just experts in whatever field that they're in. They can go in and share that knowledge, and then you have the hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy, right? It's really the hitchhiker's guide to Earth. So we'd be more than mostly harmless. Small amount of the surrounding galaxy yeah, but essentially the the sum total of what human knowledge is could go on the Internet and be in a database that you could search, and it would be. The world's most complete encyclopaedia a fellow by the name of our L. Samuel. came up with an idea to call it inter pedia. And it was kind of this interesting point of discussion, but it never went beyond that it was just one of those. Hey, andy! Cool, F-. Yeah, exactly! Maybe if someone who has more time and resources could do this. It would be awesome. And then in Nineteen ninety-four. Very important development happened and. It happened this early because this was the development of the wiki platform, and the fact that it happened in ninety four amazes me because I was largely unaware of wicky until Wikipedia came along. Yeah me as well so I mean I had been on the web since the early nineties but I just didn't know about wikileaks for many years almost a decade and was and when I finally did start to learn about what. They were strange and unusual to me because it was a different experience than your average website right? Yeah, usually most websites and most books are based on this idea that there is one expert who is who is this terrific expert is talking to you about this thing, and that's and that's where it starts and stops arguing with them. Particularly right. There might be some form of comment. ability on site where people can contribute to the discussion, but in general the content of the site itself is created by a person or an organization, but no one else right. It's not like you. You know Bob can just log in and put in Bob's section and then joe over here logs, inputs and Joe's section. It's Bobby Joe can't do anything because they can just go and view. The site with a wicky was based on a completely different idea, and it was designed by a guy named Ward Cunningham, and I was first software developers. Yeah, yeah, he was he he worked for a software consulting company that he was a partner in. It was Cunningham and Cunningham also known as C. TO DOT COM and he was developing this this platform for Portland pattern repository. And he called it Waikiki Web. Right based on the Hawaiian Word Waikiki Waikiki. Which means I'm quick quick. Yeah, there's a the wikki shuttle in Honolulu which is. An airport shuttle. I've been on the shuttle and I remember my wife being. Really amused every time. She saw the Wiki wiki shuttle. She just loved Wiki Wiki. Obviously I've married the right woman. A Ward Cunningham comes up with this idea for the Wiki and essentially what a wicky is, it's a website. The has collaborative editing tools built into the site itself, so you you navigate to the site through a browser right and within the browser you can make changes to the site collaboratively, so depending upon the level of administrative power. You have you can, you can edit things you can add things you can delete things, and it's since it's all within the web browser. You're using a basic markup language, or maybe some sort of rich text editor. and. Let people collaborate on projects. Even if they had different machines right, so if laurens using a Mac and I'm using a PC, not only do we hate each other, but often we can't work on the same thing because our platforms are so different right, but this is web based so all we have to do is use whichever browsers web browser we both, and then we navigate there, and we can make these changes in build our collaborative I hate you website together and other people can join in and explain why they hate everybody. And I don't know why I'm so negative today, but apparently that's how it's going to work so Cunningham develops this wicky technology, which is what makes wikipedia possible, but we're not at wikipedia yet now right, because yeah, well, go ahead all I was just GonNa, say in one, thousand, nine, hundred and nine. That's when we start talking about. Jimmy Wales who is kind of the face of Kapadia, a right right? Yeah! I was GONNA say that same time around nineteen ninety four was when Jimmy Wales had dropped out of college he had started started a couple months. For Finance PhD from Indiana University and wound up instead of doing that going to Chicago to be futures and options trader, and supposedly much like Elon Musk who we have previously profiled. Jimmy Wales noticed that you know Netscape, went public, and and what the quadrupled in value overnight netscape did well, yes. They did good. And took note of that and said Hey this internet. Thing that I've been kind of playing around with for a few years. I think that could be a thing. This might go places, and of course remember this is all before the dot com bubble burst to so of course back then it was all opportunity and wild west, and no one was really sure and bright shining dream. Yeah, it was. It was interesting you know. The roads weren't paved with gold, but they were paved with stock options. Jimmy Wales. has this thought while he's working for a? While he he's part owner of a company called Bomas Dot. com which is a search engine, and he owned that with two other joint owners, ten Shell and Michael Davis..

wikipedia Ward Cunningham Jimmy Wales editor Waikiki Web Bobby Joe Rick Gates Jimmy Wales. Waikiki Honolulu Netscape webb andy Bob L. Samuel. Portland partner Elon Musk
"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

TechStuff

07:48 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on TechStuff

"About the writing level, yeah, juncture right, but but I used to write these these long articles and one of the policies and how stuff works. Is that you do not use compe- as a source. And I used to be an editor before I was a podcast and social media person, and yes, that was one of the things that we very firmly enforced. are still do and really the reason for that has nothing to do with whether or not the well it. Something to do with whether or not the information you find on Wikipedia is reliable, but more importantly, wikipedia is a dynamic thing right? It can be written and edited by anybody at any time, and so when you sit there and site something from Wikipedia, it may be the next time someone visits that particular entry the the. Information has changed, and it may be that the information now is where accurate than it was or maybe less accurate at any rate, the things that make wikipedia a useful tool in day to day I need to get this information are the same things that make it a dangerous tool right if you are writing in any sort of academe IQ or professional. Yeah thank you editor for the word that I don't have. But, really before we get into all the pros and cons are just on. Let's talk about the history so before there was a wikipedia back when there was just barely a web. Yeah, yeah, it was more more local networks of computers and some of them. Could you know key and other local networks? We did have an Internet. And Web was a thing, but it was very young, but back in hundred ninety three. So you know the web essentially is introduced ninety two right right ninety three, so webb has not been around for very long. Rick Gates comes up with this idea, he says. You know what would be really super awesome if if we were to build an encyclopedia that lived on the Internet and if you made that encyclopedias something that anyone could contribute to so that way you can tap into the world's knowledge and people who are really just experts in whatever field that they're in. They can go in and share that knowledge, and then you have the hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy, right? It's really the hitchhiker's guide to Earth. So we'd be more than mostly harmless. Small amount of the surrounding galaxy yeah, but essentially the the sum total of what human knowledge is could go on the Internet and be in a database that you could search, and it would be. The world's most complete encyclopaedia a fellow by the name of our L. Samuel. came up with an idea to call it inter pedia. And it was kind of this interesting point of discussion, but it never went beyond that it was just one of those. Hey, andy! Cool, F-. Yeah, exactly! Maybe if someone who has more time and resources could do this. It would be awesome. And then in Nineteen ninety-four. Very important development happened and. It happened this early because this was the development of the wiki platform, and the fact that it happened in ninety four amazes me because I was largely unaware of wicky until Wikipedia came along. Yeah me as well so I mean I had been on the web since the early nineties but I just didn't know about wikileaks for many years almost a decade and was and when I finally did start to learn about what. They were strange and unusual to me because it was a different experience than your average website right? Yeah, usually most websites and most books are based on this idea that there is one expert who is who is this terrific expert is talking to you about this thing, and that's and that's where it starts and stops arguing with them. Particularly right. There might be some form of comment. ability on site where people can contribute to the discussion, but in general the content of the site itself is created by a person or an organization, but no one else right. It's not like you. You know Bob can just log in and put in Bob's section and then joe over here logs, inputs and Joe's section. It's Bobby Joe can't do anything because they can just go and view. The site with a wicky was based on a completely different idea, and it was designed by a guy named Ward Cunningham, and I was first software developers. Yeah, yeah, he was he he worked for a software consulting company that he was a partner in. It was Cunningham and Cunningham also known as C. TO DOT COM and he was developing this this platform for Portland pattern repository. And he called it Waikiki Web. Right based on the Hawaiian Word Waikiki Waikiki. Which means I'm quick quick. Yeah, there's a the wikki shuttle in Honolulu which is. An airport shuttle. I've been on the shuttle and I remember my wife being. Really amused every time. She saw the Wiki wiki shuttle. She just loved Wiki Wiki. Obviously I've married the right woman. A Ward Cunningham comes up with this idea for the Wiki and essentially what a wicky is, it's a website. The has collaborative editing tools built into the site itself, so you you navigate to the site through a browser right and within the browser you can make changes to the site collaboratively, so depending upon the level of administrative power. You have you can, you can edit things you can add things you can delete things, and it's since it's all within the web browser. You're using a basic markup language, or maybe some sort of rich text editor. and. Let people collaborate on projects. Even if they had different machines right, so if laurens using a Mac and I'm using a PC, not only do we hate each other, but often we can't work on the same thing because our platforms are so different right, but this is web based so all we have to do is use whichever browsers web browser we both, and then we navigate there, and we can make these changes in build our collaborative I hate you website together and other people can join in and explain why they hate everybody. And I don't know why I'm so negative today, but apparently that's how it's going to work so Cunningham develops this wicky technology, which is what makes wikipedia possible, but we're not at wikipedia yet now right, because yeah, well, go ahead all I was just GonNa, say in one, thousand, nine, hundred and nine. That's when we start talking about. Jimmy Wales who is kind of the face of Kapadia, a right right? Yeah! I was GONNA say that same time around nineteen ninety four was when Jimmy Wales had dropped out of college he had started started a couple months. For Finance PhD from Indiana University and wound up instead of doing that going to Chicago to be futures and options trader, and supposedly much like Elon Musk who we have previously profiled. Jimmy Wales noticed that you know Netscape, went public, and and what the quadrupled in value overnight netscape did well, yes. They did good. And took note of that and said Hey this internet. Thing that I've been kind of playing around with for a few years. I think that could be a thing. This might go places, and of course remember this is all before the dot com bubble burst to so of course back then it was all opportunity and wild west, and no one was really sure and bright shining dream. Yeah, it was. It was interesting you know. The roads weren't paved with gold, but they were paved with stock options. Jimmy Wales. has this thought while he's working for a? While he he's part owner of a company called Bomas Dot. com which is a search engine, and he owned that with two other joint owners, ten Shell and Michael Davis..

wikipedia Ward Cunningham Jimmy Wales editor Waikiki Web Bobby Joe Rick Gates Jimmy Wales. Waikiki Honolulu Netscape webb andy Bob L. Samuel. Portland partner Elon Musk
"wikipedia" Discussed on The Michael Cheney Show

The Michael Cheney Show

10:53 min | 1 year ago

"wikipedia" Discussed on The Michael Cheney Show

"Yes today will be very nice day unless you resort to doing any kind of research or taking anything as a fact that you find on wikipedia now. This is hardly shocking. News is hardly a breaking news but they're awesome new studies coming out. Some new reports either just been released Shedding yet more dirt or yet more light into the sordid nature of wikipedia and the editors and the admins at that site before we dive into that. Let's talk about the numbers. Did you know? Wikipedia gets nine billion page views a month. Nine billion now yes. Get an absolutely incredible amounts of traffic's. He might think well on their law people behind while not really some of the the content has been credited. They're only five hundred abdomens looking after the whole site. There are a total of six million articles on the site nuts. Three point five billion woods and there is an edit made on wikipedia actually. There's two edits made on wikipedia every single second of every day now. Let's talk about the dream of wikipedia. And then we'll talk about the nightmare so the dream wikipedia of course was to kind of replace the encyclopedia but Dewey Online in a way that anybody can chip in and everybody kind of south polices and polices one another and it becomes this huge resource of factual information. That's fat check from different sources and is completely unbiased and not leaning towards any political persuasion. Sounds ridiculous doesn't it so even to even dream that could happen regularly on the Internet But that's set out to do. What do you think did they did? They succeed without La. Exhau- let's Let's talk about it. So editors right there's some editors of these editors on Wikipedia some actually paid by corporations to spin that content so companies say look. We've got an entry wikipedia. Someone's credit page about all this bad stuff on his about about on there. Can you change that little bit? And they will pray editors of Wikipedia. In some cases. We'll get paid to change your page to create a page or to promote a page in certain way companies are also high. Pr firms and WIKIPEDIA specialists actually make favorable edits to change that perception or even raise history or alter the narrative and take things out that they don't want to they. Don't WanNa be in there so down for a second. I'm sure you don't anyway but number second thing that what you see. A wikipedia is is the truth it's mainly a redacted version of the truth and they do have a policy where they say. We competed says we. We recommend we strongly recommend in suggest that all editors do disclose if they have any commercial arrangements when they wrote this piece of being paid by. Anybody it's nice sensual that they do strongly recommended strongly suggested it's not an essential thing economy removed as an editor. If you don't some do it some down. I mean. We don't know the ones that don't do right now. There's a high profile editor. Wikipedia goes by the name of Philip Cross and he turned out to be actually linked to UK intelligence as well as several mainstream journalists. So this is one of the prolific editors. He's going in is making edits every single day. Three hundred sixty five days a year since I got close links to UK intelligence community. So again you will. What the chances of me going on the and finding out something unbiased about the government or about intelligence community itself if some of the editors on there actually got close ties to those organizations in Germany. There was a really kind of aggressive at. Its was submitting and editing stuff. Over in the German version of wikipedia he was exposed as being a again a political operative and he was actually serving in the Israeli army and people were even call in Switzerland as being government employees and kind of cool y washing entries about the secret service over in Switzerland. So again going on there and you you think you get in the the real information and again this is something that we've probably known suspected. But you know this has been proven now time and time again and information as we know is the currency of choice right now you know information is power what what people think and what people base. Their opinions on their actions on is all important. You know investment decisions by corporations. Are we going to invest in this country? This country will this product or this product. Baked Goto wikipedia. They do the research. And it's being twisted it's been shaped. Obviously votes is a huge thing. You know if the tyrants WANNA stay in power and they've done some shady wall or they've done something really dodgy in with prisoners. Will you know some kind of war crime? Of course it's in their interest to get raised or change from wikipedia so that most people don't find it and they still vote to keep the tyrants in plain thing that they're looking after them and naturally train infringe against their against their liberties and this is exactly what's happening exactly what's happening so who is actually behind. Wikipedia was what's going on really. Where's the money coming from? Who's donating money to Wikipedia? And who's WHO's paying for these edits. Who's who the real kind of puppet masters here. Well the companies behind Wikipedia is called Wicky Media and Scott Fortune of one hundred and sixty million dollars a lot of it donated by Major. Us corporations listen to some of these donors that people have thrown donated to wikipedia. And just let it resonated with you and consider y that might be and what implications of some of the donors have contributed to that hundred sixty million dollars include Google Apple. Microsoft Goldman Sachs Intel Boeing. Cisco Chevron Hewlett Packard Netflix Disney Bank of America Exxon Mobil G Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline. Interesting interesting right. So those are the people lining wikipedia pockets. What the chances the that's going to be paid backing kind fairly high would say. Now there's an organization called the Swiss Swiss propaganda research and consider that website. They are quote research and information project on geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media which is a really snappy title issued. Stick up Natasha Anyway. According to them and I quote eight percent of all wikipedia content is written by just one percent of all wikipedia editors which again amounts to just a few hundred mostly on known people. Is this a big deal? Though you might think well why second just wikipedia. Nobody really goes to keep eater now of see you and I are away to you. Know we've been awakened to this and we've got our eyes on consist but most people don't they just go to Google. They tie pen something and the first result normally is wikipedia. So they go over there and they swallow it. A recent study was done that showed most people trust wikipedia as much as they trust the news and again you and I love cheese. I don't trust the news. All let's fine you and I we were you know were similar. We we've had is open to what's really going on here but most people are still asleep. And they trust the news and they trust wikipedia and this is important because it's keeping them asleep and is misleading them on what is actually happening underneath the surface and behind the headlines now according to Reuters the CIA and FBI of Been digging into wikipedia and screwing up a quote people using CIA FBI. Computers have edited entries in the Online Encyclopedia wikipedia on topics including the Iraq war and the Guantanamo prison. Well isn't that interesting? Isn't that curious? So there's been a number of editors of put these pieces together about the Iraq war back Guantanamo by and guess war. Cia FBI go in there and said no no. Let's not actually published. Let's redact that. Let's reduce that. Let's change the wording here and song so again. It's a version of the truth. It's big brother but it's actually happening in writing their own news. Speak that changing the past and there are rising history where it fits them to put themselves in a better light. Now is a really cool. Studied on very recently was just released a couple of days ago. by organization cooled. She was done by a researcher done by the Atlantic or published on the Atlantic. Just want to read this quote. This is the guy that did it quote. I lost all the eight hundred eighty four million edits to English wikipedia to collect in Geo. Locate the forty three million. Ip addresses that have edited English week. Wikipedia I also counted eight point. Six million username editors who have made at least one edit to an article so this is kind of him describing this study basically what this guy has done is. He's got all information on all the edits have been made. And he's linking them to a geographical location and drawn on. A MAP is plotted at all on a map drawn. It with with a pet. Mommy look drew. The Picture Nada is used. Computers is used technology. Use the INTERWEBS. And he's Matt. How the geographical location in the US of wikipedia editors to see if he can spot trends about where the The most prevalent edits his are What kind of things Noticeable? About WIKIPEDIA EDITS IS AWESOME. You know connections that can be made between what makes a wikipedia editor. And what doesn't some just going to read some of this hour's very very interested in and I quote from this guy one of his findings on the political arena and regarding Wikipedia at its quote Don many of the low editing density areas already areas. The don't have. Many editors though many of the low editing density areas are Republican heavy.

wikipedia editor Google Us La Dewey Online Exhau Switzerland Philip Cross CIA Iraq Israeli army Scott Fortune UK Matt FBI Germany Cisco