W8: Why Wikipedia is the most efficient of all attempts to collect and organize the "sum total of human knowledge."

1) Various efforts to gather people's knowledge into one place

For a very long time, like the Gutenberg Project, an attempt to archive all books, human knowledge, in one place, continued. Even the above project is in progress. It is very valuable to bring together the things that are scattered here and there in print. However, despite these attempts, technical problems and differences in values ​​of each person did not result in a successful completion. However, the launch of Wikipedia was successful because it was accompanied by the advent of the Internet, that is, technology and, according to some, "free time".

 

2) Why Wikipedia is the most efficient means

Wikipedia wasn't the first attempt to unite people's knowledge. There have been so many attempts, but among them, Wikipedia is the most successful in "technology". In the past, there was a lack of technology to actually implement these attempts, and there was a limit to actually creating ideals. However, now, with the development of Internet 2.0 and becoming a participatory platform, this has become possible. It is a very attractive point for people to be able to easily record their knowledge in a space where everyone can see it anytime, anywhere in these days. In other words, because technology and living environment fit together well, Wikipedia works as the most effective means of combining knowledge.

 

3) Points to think about

Could there be a space for more efficient knowledge aggregation than Wikipedia? Currently, the number of Wikipedia users is declining. This means that Wikipedia is less attractive to people than it was a few years ago. How will the future technology and the Internet flow, and what type of platform will it fit?

Comments

  1. Shinhee Kim, 김신희April 24, 2021 at 11:20 AM

    Minkyo, I read your article well. Your analysis is very well understood. I was surprised to think similarly to my discussion point. In my opinion, video is more attractive to people than text in this era, so the number of users decreases. Even in the case of Korea, there are statistics that people search on YouTube rather than Naver when searching for knowledge, so Wikipedia seems to have to overcome the limitations related to video.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W7: GFC book notes By 'William S. Kowinski' , 'Cory Doctorow','Piotr Konieczny' and 'Paul Youngquist'/ 진신

Summary- William S. Kowinski: The true exception is the innovative success of a collaborative effort that has prime online reference work called Wikipedia. This book is not meant to be biography or reportage, but contemporary ethnography or study of a culture. What this book does well is describe how Wikipedia works and what issues have arisen.  It's short on drama and personality，and so it's probably destined to be a source document. Since that seems unlikely, this may remain the best opportunity for learning about this remarkable project. Summary- Cory Doctorow: Reagle makes an excellent case that this assumption of good faith is particularly powerful when it comes to dealing with those who lack good faith — it creates positive outcomes for arguments with everyone from neo-Nazis to political hacks who're whitewashing their boss's entries. Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative cu...
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

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