I think that the wiki medium can be very useful. And I am in general a fan of wikipedia. But the unquestioning devotion that many pay to wikipedia and other 'Web 2.0' sites alarms me. Thus do I turn to Nick Carr for a bit of sanity.
His latest piece is an analysis of the Nature article contrasting Encyclopedia Brittanica and Wikipedia, an article which, as he writes, has become something of a get-out-of-jail-free card for Wikipedia and its fans. Today, whenever someone raises questions about the encyclopedia's quality, the readymade retort is: "Nature says it's as good as Britannica."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
First post of my South Africa vacation 2009 travelogue. A summary of the last few days in brief. Sunday 05/31 - We left home remarkably earl... -
The New Statesman brings us a review by Mark Bearn of a recent translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead. He gives us a rather unflatteri...
-
The mountain man and the surgeon - economist.com Relative levels of poverty, using examples from Appalachia and the Congo. The internet is ...
No comments:
Post a Comment