W4 : After reading "The Puzzle of Openness" / Suyoung Han

 After reading "The Puzzle of Openness"


1)   Summary – The puzzle of openness

The material is said to contain open content-type communities with the following characteristics related to openness: Open content, Transparency, Integrity, Non-discrimination and Non-interference. The material is said to contain open content-type communities with the following characteristics related to openness: open content, transparency, integrity, non-discrimination and non-interference.

As to whether this has been applied in practice, four points of debate on openness are presented in the data: The meaning of What anyone can edit, Interactions with the outside world, Bureaucratization, and How openness within Wikipedia is achieved through the establishment of closed groups.

In the end, even if we have these points of discussion, we are trying to ultimately balance the values of open communities through efforts, so we need to continue discussing openness within Wikipedia.


2)   Interesting items learned - The contradiction of Bureaucratization.

I was interested in the fact that the bureaucratization on Wikipedia was presented as a discussion of openness in the material.

I thought being bureaucratized could help the information to be systematically managed, so I never thought critically like that. However, reading this article, it shocked me that being bureaucratized within Wikipedia violates the integrity and consequently shakes the openness of Wikipedia.

Through this time, I realized the paradoxical relationship that policies for freedom could rather prevent freedom, and became critical of bureaucratization.


3)   Discussion - How to stop malicious people and protect innocent people.

While reading the material, I wanted to talk about the technological constraints of one of the points of discussion, ‘Can anyone really edit?’.

In the material, anyone can access, but there is a technology that blocks the IP of malicious users. If, how do innocent anonymous users using the same IP connect in this case? When I put myself in this part, it would be very unfair if I were an innocent anonymous user. But I don't know how to solve it.

How can you protect innocent users while preventing malicious users in this area?


Comments

  1. Shinhee Kim, 김신희March 27, 2021 at 4:33 AM

    As I read your article, the point you suggested to discuss was a new point of view for me. How about applying a system that can prove one's innocence in this matter? If the person want IP to unblock it and agrees to the use of personal information, the edits he has made are anonymously shown to other users. It allows other users to judge if this is malicious, so if the majority of people find it okay, they can reactivate.

    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