2010年9月9日 星期四
Wiki vs Brittanica Group Discussion!
Group Happy schooldiscuss said:
FREE ACCESSING
On the internet, the concept of "free for sharing" is very important that will burst the development of everything and bring positive competition.
Wikipedia provides free access to all of human knowledge, ultimately providing free knowledge to anyone on anything. No fees or hidden costs- just knowledge. Furthermore it provides a neutral point of view. Since the writers and editors of Wikipedia are everyday people just like you and me, they provide both sides of a story, while a for-profit encyclopedia company may edit or revise articles or sides of a story in order to keep shareholders happy.
As a collaborative encyclopedia, Wikipedia allows people from a variety of backgrounds to come together to share knowledge and information with the rest of the world. It starts a dialogue about a specific topic and encourages the rest of the world to part-take in this dialogue. As a multilingual encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not an exclusive encyclopedia; one does not need to know English to understand the text. Articles in Spanish, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Chinese are just the beginning of Wikipedia’s multilingual text.
Real-Time Content
Article writers have the ability to change and update articles that in anytime, anywhere, they don’t have to go through the book publishers. So, the Wikipedia can be served as an online newspaper. The article about Manila hostage crisis is created on 23 August, right after it happened.
FREE ACCESSING
On the internet, the concept of "free for sharing" is very important that will burst the development of everything and bring positive competition.
Wikipedia provides free access to all of human knowledge, ultimately providing free knowledge to anyone on anything. No fees or hidden costs- just knowledge. Furthermore it provides a neutral point of view. Since the writers and editors of Wikipedia are everyday people just like you and me, they provide both sides of a story, while a for-profit encyclopedia company may edit or revise articles or sides of a story in order to keep shareholders happy.
As a collaborative encyclopedia, Wikipedia allows people from a variety of backgrounds to come together to share knowledge and information with the rest of the world. It starts a dialogue about a specific topic and encourages the rest of the world to part-take in this dialogue. As a multilingual encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not an exclusive encyclopedia; one does not need to know English to understand the text. Articles in Spanish, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Chinese are just the beginning of Wikipedia’s multilingual text.
Real-Time Content
Article writers have the ability to change and update articles that in anytime, anywhere, they don’t have to go through the book publishers. So, the Wikipedia can be served as an online newspaper. The article about Manila hostage crisis is created on 23 August, right after it happened.
2010年9月8日 星期三
Wikipedia VS Brittanica
Since the evil aliens are attacking our planet, burning our trees, killing our pandas. It is a must for us to choose Wikipedia or encyclopaedia, with reasons, to save our people, our knowledge, and our culture. For me, I would say that Wikipedia is the one to be preserved.
First of all, Wikipedia has a much larger archive then any encyclopaedia in this world. According to Wikipedia, there is 16 million articles have been saved, comparing to some proprietary encyclopaedia, Britannica for example, Britannica only got about half a million. If most of the articles are correct, larger archive always means larger amount of knowledge.
Wikipedia is as trust-able as some proprietary encyclopaedia (such as Britannica). According to a study which is done by journal Nature in 2005, they used 42 articles as the samples, based on their checking, Wikipedia got 4 errors, and Britannica got 3 errors, they concluded that the accuracy level of Wikipedia scientific articles is similar to Encyclopedia Britannica.
However, someone in this planet may argue that Wikipedia has a lower accuracy rate as all the users can remove the accurate article(vandalism) and post some inaccurate article to Wikipedia. Luckily, according to a study which is done by IBM in 2003, they found out that vandalism is not easy to be done in Wikipedia, as vandalism is repaired very quickly, and conclude that Wikipedia has a very good self-healing system.
In my opinion, Wikipedia is better than encyclopaedia in cultural aspect. That because Wikipedia is created by millions of internet users, so we can see lots of articles that are related to sub-culture or internet culture, such as "l33t speak"(f.g.1). And these articles may not be included in some encyclopaedia (fig.2), as they are created by some scholars. I think internet culture is very important, as it can show the moral concept and trend in the internet society, and our children/ aliens can read the articles and know what is the culture in the internet.
First of all, Wikipedia has a much larger archive then any encyclopaedia in this world. According to Wikipedia, there is 16 million articles have been saved, comparing to some proprietary encyclopaedia, Britannica for example, Britannica only got about half a million. If most of the articles are correct, larger archive always means larger amount of knowledge.
Wikipedia is as trust-able as some proprietary encyclopaedia (such as Britannica). According to a study which is done by journal Nature in 2005, they used 42 articles as the samples, based on their checking, Wikipedia got 4 errors, and Britannica got 3 errors, they concluded that the accuracy level of Wikipedia scientific articles is similar to Encyclopedia Britannica.
However, someone in this planet may argue that Wikipedia has a lower accuracy rate as all the users can remove the accurate article(vandalism) and post some inaccurate article to Wikipedia. Luckily, according to a study which is done by IBM in 2003, they found out that vandalism is not easy to be done in Wikipedia, as vandalism is repaired very quickly, and conclude that Wikipedia has a very good self-healing system.
In my opinion, Wikipedia is better than encyclopaedia in cultural aspect. That because Wikipedia is created by millions of internet users, so we can see lots of articles that are related to sub-culture or internet culture, such as "l33t speak"(f.g.1). And these articles may not be included in some encyclopaedia (fig.2), as they are created by some scholars. I think internet culture is very important, as it can show the moral concept and trend in the internet society, and our children/ aliens can read the articles and know what is the culture in the internet.
 |
| fig.1 |
 | ||||||||||||||||
| fig.2 |
I don't know will these aliens accept my idea or not, but if you agree with me, please unite our power by posting your comment, if you don't agree with me, please tell me!
Modern Times
1. In this film, it seems that boss is the only one who is benefited by the technology. He used cameras to spy Charlie and manage his company, he used machinery for mass production, and he use that feeding machine to cut the lunchtime! Everything that the boss did, is to push every workers to the limit, and push his profit to the limit, this is the benefit for the boss.
2. It also seems that the technology is causing a great trouble for Charlie, but not for his boss. Charlie's mind is twisted by the machine, he can't stop working, and he even "work" the other strangers, causing trouble to the others. And for his body, he is harmed by the "feeding machine"! And for his life, beside he gone mad because of the machinery, his life is also being "watched" by his boss.
3. I agree that technology really change our mind/ habit, for Charlie, he can't stop working. For me, my computer has changed me, I will turn on my computer unconsciously when I get home. My life is really filled by technology (for example: forum, youtube, mp3. internet, facebook...etc), but I think it is ok, as I think that I still got my real life, and not totally controlled by my computer.
It seems that other classmates agree what I think about this film. And they think that technology can give them a more convenient life, I agree with this idea too, for example, comparing writing and typing, it is obvious that typing is way faster then writing, comparing horse cart and car, comparing email and snail mail, technology always win, and technology always makes our life become more convenient.
2. It also seems that the technology is causing a great trouble for Charlie, but not for his boss. Charlie's mind is twisted by the machine, he can't stop working, and he even "work" the other strangers, causing trouble to the others. And for his body, he is harmed by the "feeding machine"! And for his life, beside he gone mad because of the machinery, his life is also being "watched" by his boss.
3. I agree that technology really change our mind/ habit, for Charlie, he can't stop working. For me, my computer has changed me, I will turn on my computer unconsciously when I get home. My life is really filled by technology (for example: forum, youtube, mp3. internet, facebook...etc), but I think it is ok, as I think that I still got my real life, and not totally controlled by my computer.
It seems that other classmates agree what I think about this film. And they think that technology can give them a more convenient life, I agree with this idea too, for example, comparing writing and typing, it is obvious that typing is way faster then writing, comparing horse cart and car, comparing email and snail mail, technology always win, and technology always makes our life become more convenient.
ABOUT ME
Hello! My name is Kit, I love music of different genres (rock & roll, brit rock, electronica, tango, jazz, pop, twee pop...etc) and music from different countries.
And art (especially street art, media art)
and films (especially comedy, animation, cult)
and games
and food
and friends
and etc
What do you like??
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)