W3 : Collective intelligence and the Internet 2.0

■ Wikipedia and Internet 2.0

■ "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"

■ Why have people aspired to a knowledge-sharing platform?

 

1) Wikipedia and Internet 2.0

I could think about Web 2.0 and Wikipedia. I focused on the features of Web 2.0 and the Wikipedia’s features.

First, Web 2.0 is a new type of Internet, different from the previous traditional Web 1.0. In the form of Web 1.0, ordinary Internet users could only "consume" content on the Internet as if they were reading books, not developers. However, with the advent of Web 2.0, the role of Internet users in the Internet world has been fully amplified and a new phase has taken place.

And Wikipedia, as we've been learning for three weeks, is an open encyclopedia. In other words, it is collective intelligence itself, which anyone can describe, edit, add, and change knowledge on Wikipedia. In addition, Wikipedia takes the form of accumulating data, so we can access the history of how the data has changed. This reveals the characteristics of Wikipedia, which is a participatory encyclopedia.

Therefore, Web 2.0 and Wikipedia are inseparable, and we can see that Wikipedia uses the feature of Web 2.0, at 100% or more.

 

2) "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"

I was very impressed with this sentence, “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are show”. This sentence means that the more people participate, the fewer errors there are. In fact, At first, I thought if more people participated in editing, there would be as many errors as that percentage. However, I was wrong. This is because the number of errors found and corrected is larger than the number of errors that grow by many people participating in wiki editing. And I think this point clearly reveals what ‘collective intelligence' is. When intelligence is gathered, it can be said that there is definitely development in quality as well as in quantity.

 

3) Why have people aspired to common knowledge?

This week's reading shows the history of Wikipedia's success as a participatory encyclopedia. For some time now, many people have wanted something to connect and share knowledge in various fields. So, even the time that Web 2.0-based technology didn't exist, people wanted something that had the form of Wikipedia today. It would have been hard to imagine, and they wouldn't have predicted whether it would be successful. So, I want to discuss why people have wanted such a platform like Wikipedia. 

Comments

  1. 박채정 Park ChaeJeongMarch 24, 2021 at 2:07 AM

    Hi, Minkyo. I read your article well.

    I agree with the sentence "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow." There is a Korean proverb that says, "A lot of cooks spoil the broth." So I thought that there would be many problems and many things to worry about using Wikipedia.

    But as I listen to the lecture day by day, I realize that Wikipedia is different from what I thought. Wikipedia already has a solution to what I'm worried about, and there are good precedents. The more I know, the more interesting the encyclopedia I think it is. Isn't it?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more