![](\"http:\/\/cyber.law.harvard.edu\/blogs\/static\/dowbrigade\/wikifoxtrot.gif\")
<\/p>\n
Don’t know how we missed this one yesterday. Wiki-mania has reached A Wiki<\/a> is basically (Actually, looking at it this morning while creating the above link, Wikipedia<\/a> is the flagship project A recent So is it to be trusted? Does it have the credibility of Britannica? In fact, open architecture is in some sense the only possible way to do what What is perhaps most fascinating about Wikipedia is its demonstration in practical It is still an experiment, the outcome and ultimate utility of LA Times Article<\/a><\/p>\n Wikipedia<\/a> itself<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Don’t know how we missed this one yesterday. Wiki-mania has reached the mainstream, or at least the comics pages of the Boston Globe. What is a Wiki? Simply one of the most fascinating experiments in communal knowledge ever attempted. A … Continue reading
\n the mainstream, or at least the comics pages of the Boston
\n Globe<\/a>. What
\n is a Wiki<\/a>? Simply one
\n of the most fascinating experiments in communal knowledge ever attempted.<\/p>\n
\n a web page that ANY VIEWER can change, alter, add to or erase at any
\n time. Madness? Anarchy? Well, actually quite
\n useful for a variety of collaborative projects and information sharing. For
\n example, we are using a Wiki to develop a central source of "Getting
\n Started" materials (videos, manuals, walk-throughs, workshops) for people
\n who want to try blogging for the first time, called the "Blogging
\n 101 Project<\/a>". It has been working quite well for the small group
\n of participants, separated by geography and schedules, despite having
\n been defaced several
\n times by malicious outsiders.<\/p>\n
\n we note it has been vandalized again. We may have to take the unfortunate
\n step of requiring visitors to sign in with a name and email address before
\n making changes to the page – the virtual equivalent of starting to lock
\n the doors when you leave the house. Gratuitous commentary on the stupidity
\n of vandalism would be redundant.)<\/p>\n
\n of the Wiki revolution – nothing less than an attempt to create a living
\n encyclopedia of the current state
\n of human knowledge. Anyone can add, alter, amend or correct any
\n entry. Despite predictions of infinite varieties of failure, the
\n actual effort is surprisingly complete and correct. It has captured enough
\n imaginations of trustworthy and knowledgeable people that a critical
\n mass has been reached which overwhelms isolated havoc wreckers. When
\n people put false or opinionated stuff up it is usually eliminated in
\n minutes.<\/p>\n
\n article in the Los Angeles Times<\/a> by Crispin Sartwell explores
\n the phenomena:<\/p>\n\n
\n Well, I have monitored over a decent period a number of entries on matters
\n about which I know something and have found them almost invariably accurate.
\n And I have watched some of them grow, becoming ever more elaborate and
\n interlinked.<\/p>\n
\n an encyclopedia purports to do: represent the state of human knowledge in real
\n time. Such a project is by its nature so huge that it requires what Wikipedia
\n has: thousands of experts, editors, checkers and so on with expertise in different
\n fields working over a period of years. Also, Wikipedia<\/a>,
\n unlike the World Book, for example, or even Encarta, is updated continuously.
\n When we use the term "public
\n property," we usually mean state property, but Wikipedia compromises the
\n concept of ownership without dispossessing anyone: It is truly public property.<\/p>\n
\n anarchy. It is an ever-shifting, voluntary, collaborative enterprise. If it is
\n in the long run successful, it would show that people can make amazing things
\n together without being commanded, constrained, taxed, bribed or punished. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n which is still very much up in the air. The Dowbrigade has it permanently
\n on the menu bar of his browser, and checks it before Encarta or Britanica.
\n We encourage our readers to check it out. Look
\n up something you consider yourself an expert in. Evaluate the correctness
\n of what you find. If there is something you know more about than what
\n you find, add to the
\n collective
\n knowledge.
\n You never
\n know who might be needing it next.<\/p>\n