WIKIPEDIA or Brittanica
What's the true fee?
Wikipedia, the mere fact that it is free, makes it worthwhile exploring. After-all, isn’t it just plain human nature to want things that are free? Also, doesn’t it just make good sense to use products that are free rather than pay a fee for it? In order to respond to those questions, we must consider what is the true cost? In other words, will the information be credible. Ian McGill stated “information should be "free" not like free as in beer but like without confinement or gates”.
The origin of Wikipedia has a noble aurora. A group of highly qualified contributors wanted to develop a free encyclopedia known as Nupedia. However, the project was moving very slow and Larry Sanger introduced the wiki format and the rest became history. Another feature that I find somewhat noble is it allows anyone to contribute or edit. However, the question is, how reliable is this source when it allows anyone to contribute as well as edit.
Although, the article stated that Wikipedia is just as reliable as Britannica encyclopedia, because of the processes that Wikipedia have in place in an attempt to ensure that the information is credible, I still have reservations in using Wikipedia. A good point was made in the article when it stated that the information should be validated by another source. It also stated, that “Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start”. In other words, many articles go through a metamorphosis over a period of time until the article is considered balanced.
My concern is generally when you look at various books/references such as the dictionary or encyclopedia, you consider them as the source of truth. You rarely consider cross referencing unless you have some former knowledge that would cause you to question the information. I must admit, if I were using the Britannica encyclopedia I would not necessarily cross reference the document with another source to validate or for support. I’m not justifying that this is best thing to do; and I believe that many other people may do the same.
I am in agreement with the librarian in the article Free Range Librarian. I want to keep my garden free of weeds. The best way that I know to do that is to make sure that my seeds are good.
Strenski, Ellen, comp. "The Wikipedia/Encyclopaedia Britannica Controversy." University of California, Irvine. 22 Mar. 2007 -http://compositioncafe.com/25950/wikicontroversy.html-.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Free Range Librarian
Wikipedia or encyclopedia how does one choose? Usually money helps us to make our decision. Wikipedia is so called free “the free-content encyclopedia” and supposedly fun for the user, whereas, there appears to be a fee to use the Britannica encyclopedia. In order to make a wise choice, one must understand what information is provided in each, because the integrity of the information is just as important as the cost.
In the reading Free Range Librarian the librarian saw herself as a gardener, weeding what does not belong in the garden and cultivating the grounds so that the blooms would flourish. She also used analogies that illustrated growth of mind from reading. She indicated, “with respect to information, let a thousand flowers bloom” and, “information is not a nasty-tasting medicine but a lily of the field”. That is why the resources that she recommended must have quality. It must be able to fit into the garden without causing weeds to grow (bad information or unreliable). The librarian stated some interesting points that raised the question as to whether the Wikipedia is just a credible as the Britannica encyclopedia? One question was, how can information that can be edited by anyone be trusted? Another comment made was that the Wikipedia was fast and fun which undermines quality and reflects the interest of the people creating the work. With that being said, it already raises the question of the reliability of the information.
The librarian also saw herself as a gatekeeper; someone that actively prevents people from accessing information. People rely on librarians to provide them with good information or at the very least, direction. Therefore, it is essential that the librarian can stand behind the resources that they support. However, Wikipedia’s tagline “anyone can edit” makes it difficult to support.
The role of the librarian has expanded over the years, as they no longer just need to know the Dewey Decimal system. Now they must be knowledgeable of world wide information in order to be able to help their users. As for me, I like to know that I can trust the information I use. Although, I know there may be some fallacy in the information, it still isn’t as subjective as it is with Wikipedia, since anyone can edit. And the individual editing the information will probably put their spin on the information. I guess you can call me “old fashion”, but I’ll stick with the encyclopedia for now.
Schneider, K. G. "Free Range Librarian." 22 Mar. 2007 -http://freerangelibrarian.com/archives/052905/wikipedia.php-.
In the reading Free Range Librarian the librarian saw herself as a gardener, weeding what does not belong in the garden and cultivating the grounds so that the blooms would flourish. She also used analogies that illustrated growth of mind from reading. She indicated, “with respect to information, let a thousand flowers bloom” and, “information is not a nasty-tasting medicine but a lily of the field”. That is why the resources that she recommended must have quality. It must be able to fit into the garden without causing weeds to grow (bad information or unreliable). The librarian stated some interesting points that raised the question as to whether the Wikipedia is just a credible as the Britannica encyclopedia? One question was, how can information that can be edited by anyone be trusted? Another comment made was that the Wikipedia was fast and fun which undermines quality and reflects the interest of the people creating the work. With that being said, it already raises the question of the reliability of the information.
The librarian also saw herself as a gatekeeper; someone that actively prevents people from accessing information. People rely on librarians to provide them with good information or at the very least, direction. Therefore, it is essential that the librarian can stand behind the resources that they support. However, Wikipedia’s tagline “anyone can edit” makes it difficult to support.
The role of the librarian has expanded over the years, as they no longer just need to know the Dewey Decimal system. Now they must be knowledgeable of world wide information in order to be able to help their users. As for me, I like to know that I can trust the information I use. Although, I know there may be some fallacy in the information, it still isn’t as subjective as it is with Wikipedia, since anyone can edit. And the individual editing the information will probably put their spin on the information. I guess you can call me “old fashion”, but I’ll stick with the encyclopedia for now.
Schneider, K. G. "Free Range Librarian." 22 Mar. 2007 -http://freerangelibrarian.com/archives/052905/wikipedia.php-.
Monday, March 19, 2007
New Mediaeval Aesthetic
The New Mediaeval Aesthetic is referring to the World Wide Web (WWW) or what is most commonly referred to as the Internet. In order to better understand the essence of aesthetic as it relates to this article, I found it necessary to confer with the Webster’s on-line dictionary. Normally when one thinks of aesthetic they think of art or beauty. However, Webster’s has a third definition that states… the use of technical devices in and around the work of art to differentiate its’ psychologically from reality. In my opinion this articles addresses how technology has advanced from early civilization or the medieval period unto where we are today with the Internet, and just like in the past, we are still dealing with some form of reality psychologically in regards to technology.
Zorach states the “digital culture is reflected –as in a glass darkly”. For many people including me there is a dim view of the digital culture. I only imagine this is because so many people have not been exposed to it, or dare to thread the path of technology. In addition, I am not sure if technology has been delivered in a manner that was user friendly so that it would encourage an individual to explore digital culture. At one time the Internet appeared to be geared to people that were savvy with technology. Now the Internet appears to be a tool that will be necessary in order to be able to communicate and perform more effectively in society.
Deborah Stewart indicates in her blog “Looking to the past for clues to the future may seem to some as absurd, but if lessons are not learned from the past we tend to repeat them in the future”. I concur with Deborah. Although, the statement may seem elementary, it is profound. Not only do we repeat the same lesson, but progress is stifled.
Zorach, Rebecca E. "New Medieval Aesthetic”. Wired Magazine Online January 1994.
7 March 2007. http://www.wired.com/wired/archieve/2.01/mediaeval_pr.html
Zorach states the “digital culture is reflected –as in a glass darkly”. For many people including me there is a dim view of the digital culture. I only imagine this is because so many people have not been exposed to it, or dare to thread the path of technology. In addition, I am not sure if technology has been delivered in a manner that was user friendly so that it would encourage an individual to explore digital culture. At one time the Internet appeared to be geared to people that were savvy with technology. Now the Internet appears to be a tool that will be necessary in order to be able to communicate and perform more effectively in society.
Deborah Stewart indicates in her blog “Looking to the past for clues to the future may seem to some as absurd, but if lessons are not learned from the past we tend to repeat them in the future”. I concur with Deborah. Although, the statement may seem elementary, it is profound. Not only do we repeat the same lesson, but progress is stifled.
Zorach, Rebecca E. "New Medieval Aesthetic”. Wired Magazine Online January 1994.
7 March 2007. http://www.wired.com/wired/archieve/2.01/mediaeval_pr.html
Saturday, March 17, 2007
New Mediaeval Aesthetic
The New Mediaeval Aesthetic is referring to the World Wide Web (WWW) or what is most commonly referred to as the Internet. In order to better understand the essence of aesthetic as it relates to this article, I found it necessary to confer with the Webster’s on-line dictionary. Normally when one thinks of aesthetic they think of art or beauty. However, Webster’s has a third definition that states… the use of technical devices in and around the work of art to differentiate its’ psychologically from reality. In my opinion this articles addresses how technology has advanced from early civilization or the medieval period unto where we are today with the Internet, and just like in the past, we are still dealing with some form of reality psychologically in regards to technology.
Zorach states the “digital culture is reflected –as in a glass darkly”. For many people including me there is a dim view of the digital culture. I only imagine this is because so many people have not been exposed to it, or dare to thread the path of technology. In addition, I am not sure if technology has been delivered in a manner that was user friendly so that it would encourage an individual to explore digital culture. At one time the Internet appeared to be geared to people that were savvy with technology. Now the Internet appears to be a tool that will be necessary in order to be able to communicate and perform more effectively in society.
Deborah Stewart indicates in her blog “Looking to the past for clues to the future may seem to some as absurd, but if lessons are not learned from the past we tend to repeat them in the future”. I concur with Deborah. Although, the statement may seem elementary, it is profound. Not only do we repeat the same lesson, but progress is stifled.
Zorach, Rebecca E. "New Medieval Aesthetic”. Wired Magazine Online January 1994.
7 March 2007. http://www.wired.com/wired/archieve/2.01/mediaeval_pr.html
The New Mediaeval Aesthetic is referring to the World Wide Web (WWW) or what is most commonly referred to as the Internet. In order to better understand the essence of aesthetic as it relates to this article, I found it necessary to confer with the Webster’s on-line dictionary. Normally when one thinks of aesthetic they think of art or beauty. However, Webster’s has a third definition that states… the use of technical devices in and around the work of art to differentiate its’ psychologically from reality. In my opinion this articles addresses how technology has advanced from early civilization or the medieval period unto where we are today with the Internet, and just like in the past, we are still dealing with some form of reality psychologically in regards to technology.
Zorach states the “digital culture is reflected –as in a glass darkly”. For many people including me there is a dim view of the digital culture. I only imagine this is because so many people have not been exposed to it, or dare to thread the path of technology. In addition, I am not sure if technology has been delivered in a manner that was user friendly so that it would encourage an individual to explore digital culture. At one time the Internet appeared to be geared to people that were savvy with technology. Now the Internet appears to be a tool that will be necessary in order to be able to communicate and perform more effectively in society.
Deborah Stewart indicates in her blog “Looking to the past for clues to the future may seem to some as absurd, but if lessons are not learned from the past we tend to repeat them in the future”. I concur with Deborah. Although, the statement may seem elementary, it is profound. Not only do we repeat the same lesson, but progress is stifled.
Zorach, Rebecca E. "New Medieval Aesthetic”. Wired Magazine Online January 1994.
7 March 2007. http://www.wired.com/wired/archieve/2.01/mediaeval_pr.html
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Marsha Hairston
March 9, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
The Bellagio Declaration
A group of diverse people with various backgrounds (many prestigious) wanted to make a change on how “intellectual property” was protected.The Bellagio Declaration addressed concerns regarding “intellectual property” and the effects that it had or will have on the international community. The rapid expansion of technology and the Internet influenced the creation of the declaration. This was because they (Bellagio groupers) believed that information was the most important resources. The declaration stated, “In general, we favor increased recognition and protection of the public domain. We call on the international community to expand the public domain through expansive application of concepts of “fair use,” compulsory licensing, and narrower initial coverage of property rights in the first place. Read”http://www.case.edu/affil/sce/BellagioDec.html.
The intent, just like with Lessig was not to steal from the original creator or owner, however, they felt that there should be opportunity for individuals to expand on an idea or concept that was already established...
Bellagio’s groupers like Lessig believed that few people benefited from the copyright laws. Lessig stated in his book (see Free Culture), only 6% really benefited from the copyright laws and these were generally the people that had the money and or power to get Congress to influence the copyright laws. The Bellagio documents states, “In general, systems built around the author paradigm tend to obscure the importance of the “public domain,” the intellectual and cultural commons from which future works will be constructed (see SCE -- IPCA -- Bellagio Declaration).
In the conclusion of the Bellagio Declaration it states, “since existing author-focused regimes are blind to the interest of non-authorial producers as well as to the importance of the commons, the main exception to this expansion of the public domain should be in favor of those who have been excluded by the authorial biases of current law.”
What has been made very clear to me in the readings is, we must become more knowledgeable and skillful in regards to technology, as well as stay abreast of the issues. Failure to do so would be like “sleeping through a revolution”.
March 9, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
The Bellagio Declaration
A group of diverse people with various backgrounds (many prestigious) wanted to make a change on how “intellectual property” was protected.The Bellagio Declaration addressed concerns regarding “intellectual property” and the effects that it had or will have on the international community. The rapid expansion of technology and the Internet influenced the creation of the declaration. This was because they (Bellagio groupers) believed that information was the most important resources. The declaration stated, “In general, we favor increased recognition and protection of the public domain. We call on the international community to expand the public domain through expansive application of concepts of “fair use,” compulsory licensing, and narrower initial coverage of property rights in the first place. Read”http://www.case.edu/affil/sce/BellagioDec.html.
The intent, just like with Lessig was not to steal from the original creator or owner, however, they felt that there should be opportunity for individuals to expand on an idea or concept that was already established...
Bellagio’s groupers like Lessig believed that few people benefited from the copyright laws. Lessig stated in his book (see Free Culture), only 6% really benefited from the copyright laws and these were generally the people that had the money and or power to get Congress to influence the copyright laws. The Bellagio documents states, “In general, systems built around the author paradigm tend to obscure the importance of the “public domain,” the intellectual and cultural commons from which future works will be constructed (see SCE -- IPCA -- Bellagio Declaration).
In the conclusion of the Bellagio Declaration it states, “since existing author-focused regimes are blind to the interest of non-authorial producers as well as to the importance of the commons, the main exception to this expansion of the public domain should be in favor of those who have been excluded by the authorial biases of current law.”
What has been made very clear to me in the readings is, we must become more knowledgeable and skillful in regards to technology, as well as stay abreast of the issues. Failure to do so would be like “sleeping through a revolution”.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Marsha Hairston
March 9, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Dr. Lisa Maruca and
Dr. Caroline Maun
Utopian Plagiarism, Hypertextuality, and Electronic Cultural Production
The authors attempt to cast plagiarism as a positive or constructive activity because they believe that plagiarism stimulates or promotes cultural enrichment and the expansion of ideas. Keeping this in mind, it appears that the authors are opposed to the confinements that copyright places on intellectual properties. In addition, it appears that the authors’ views are somewhat the same as Lessig’s regarding what should happen to “intellectual property” that enters into the public domain. The authors believe that the works should be available to all for their creative purposes. Lessig belief was somewhat the same as he did not want to lose history or stifle creativity.
The authors also implied that basically there are no true new thoughts, which in my opinion is reflected in this statement, “At present new conditions have emerged that once again make plagiarism an acceptable, even crucial strategy for textual production. This is the age of the recombinant, recombinant bodies, recombinant gender, recombinant texts, and recombinant culture” Click here.
The author states, “One of the main goals of the plagiarist is to restore the dynamic and unstable shift of meaning, by appropriating and recombining fragments of culture.” This statement is quite involved however, in my opinion to truly understand what this statement means, it is necessary to define recombinant. According to the on-line Merriam Webster dictionary,. the word recombinant means 1 : relating to or exhibiting genetic recombination2 a : relating to or containing genetically engineered DNA b : produced by genetic engineering recombinant http://publication.nodel.org/Utopian-Plagiarism.
Source:http//www.critical-art.net.books/ted/ted5.pdf
March 9, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Dr. Lisa Maruca and
Dr. Caroline Maun
Utopian Plagiarism, Hypertextuality, and Electronic Cultural Production
The authors attempt to cast plagiarism as a positive or constructive activity because they believe that plagiarism stimulates or promotes cultural enrichment and the expansion of ideas. Keeping this in mind, it appears that the authors are opposed to the confinements that copyright places on intellectual properties. In addition, it appears that the authors’ views are somewhat the same as Lessig’s regarding what should happen to “intellectual property” that enters into the public domain. The authors believe that the works should be available to all for their creative purposes. Lessig belief was somewhat the same as he did not want to lose history or stifle creativity.
The authors also implied that basically there are no true new thoughts, which in my opinion is reflected in this statement, “At present new conditions have emerged that once again make plagiarism an acceptable, even crucial strategy for textual production. This is the age of the recombinant, recombinant bodies, recombinant gender, recombinant texts, and recombinant culture” Click here.
The author states, “One of the main goals of the plagiarist is to restore the dynamic and unstable shift of meaning, by appropriating and recombining fragments of culture.” This statement is quite involved however, in my opinion to truly understand what this statement means, it is necessary to define recombinant. According to the on-line Merriam Webster dictionary,. the word recombinant means 1 : relating to or exhibiting genetic recombination
Source:http//www.critical-art.net.books/ted/ted5.pdf
Monday, March 5, 2007
Marsha Hairston
March 4, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Instructors: Dr. Lisa Maruca &
Dr. Caroline Maun
March 4, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Instructors: Dr. Lisa Maruca &
Dr. Caroline Maun
Conclusion, Afterwards
First let me say it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to completely understand what is happening in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Earlier Lessig spoke of “creative property”. Now Lessig introduces the concept of “intellectual property”. What is “intellectual property” and what are the issues surrounding “intellectual property in this technological age?
Lessig states in book “A sensible policy, in other words, could be a balance policy. For most of our history, both copyright and patent policies were balance in just his sense. But we as culture have lost this sense of balance. We have lost the critical eye that helps us see the difference between truth and extremism. A certain property fundamentalism having no connection to our tradition, now reigns in this culture—bizarrely, and with consequences more grave to spread of ideas and culture than almost any other single policy decision that we as a democracy will make.”
It is clear to me that there is an imbalance when comes to “Free Culture”. The balance lies with the individuals that have the money or power. Lessig illustrated this as he spoke on the drug company and the HIV epidemic in Africa. Although, it is in the power and ability of the Drug makers and government to make the drug more affordable to South Africa, they chose not to. What is also clear to me is that many people are in the dark and don’t understand the issues as it relate to “Free Culture”. After-all, technology is moving quicker than one could imagine, and keeping up with it is a challenge for the older population that have had limited exposure. However, we live in a technological society and in order not to cripple creativity or limit knowledge, we must promote free culture. We must ensure that the past is not lost and that we have the ability to constantly improve and enhance what was previously created. This does not mean not considering the creator. It simply means that we will not stifle progress.
Lawrence Lessig; Free Culure, Penguin Books, 2004
First let me say it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to completely understand what is happening in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Earlier Lessig spoke of “creative property”. Now Lessig introduces the concept of “intellectual property”. What is “intellectual property” and what are the issues surrounding “intellectual property in this technological age?
Lessig states in book “A sensible policy, in other words, could be a balance policy. For most of our history, both copyright and patent policies were balance in just his sense. But we as culture have lost this sense of balance. We have lost the critical eye that helps us see the difference between truth and extremism. A certain property fundamentalism having no connection to our tradition, now reigns in this culture—bizarrely, and with consequences more grave to spread of ideas and culture than almost any other single policy decision that we as a democracy will make.”
It is clear to me that there is an imbalance when comes to “Free Culture”. The balance lies with the individuals that have the money or power. Lessig illustrated this as he spoke on the drug company and the HIV epidemic in Africa. Although, it is in the power and ability of the Drug makers and government to make the drug more affordable to South Africa, they chose not to. What is also clear to me is that many people are in the dark and don’t understand the issues as it relate to “Free Culture”. After-all, technology is moving quicker than one could imagine, and keeping up with it is a challenge for the older population that have had limited exposure. However, we live in a technological society and in order not to cripple creativity or limit knowledge, we must promote free culture. We must ensure that the past is not lost and that we have the ability to constantly improve and enhance what was previously created. This does not mean not considering the creator. It simply means that we will not stifle progress.
Lawrence Lessig; Free Culure, Penguin Books, 2004
Marsha Hairston
March 4, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Instructors: Dr. Lisa Maruca &
Dr. Caroline Maun
Balances
Merriam Webster dictionary states balance is….. a steady position or condition to keep by balance …. something leftover. This chapter in my opinion is dealing with both. Balance to create or establish a process that will be fair for all parties intended. This would include the copyright owner as well as the individual that would like to expound or build upon the original product (book, film, etc.,). Lessig is dealing with the bureaucracy of copyright laws and how the copyright laws primarily benefit very few people. The people that benefit from the copyright laws are those whose products were very marketable. For products that were not as marketable they would not be in the public domain and these products would become lost. As stated in Lessig article “only 2% has work of any continuing commercial value. The copyright will not expire as long as congress is free to be bought to extend the term again.”
The problem with the copyright law is that old books will get lost because there is no way to determine who owns the copyright. Therefore, in this technological society where more and more people are using technology these books will become books of the past. In addition, as Lessig points out, the creativity will be lost. In addition, the opportunity to expand on a concept or idea will be diminished as no-one will have access to the books.
Lessig states 94% of the films and books published between 1923 and 1946 will not be available because there is no way to find out the owner.
Lessig proposed that in an effort to establish some balance, copyright owners should pay a small fee after the copyright has been in effect for 50 years. This proposal would require copyright owners to pay a small fee to register their work. If they did not pay the fee the work would be pass to the public domain.
Lessig, Lawrence: Free Culture, Penguin Press, 2004
March 4, 2007
Theory of Internet Writing
Instructors: Dr. Lisa Maruca &
Dr. Caroline Maun
Balances
Merriam Webster dictionary states balance is….. a steady position or condition to keep by balance …. something leftover. This chapter in my opinion is dealing with both. Balance to create or establish a process that will be fair for all parties intended. This would include the copyright owner as well as the individual that would like to expound or build upon the original product (book, film, etc.,). Lessig is dealing with the bureaucracy of copyright laws and how the copyright laws primarily benefit very few people. The people that benefit from the copyright laws are those whose products were very marketable. For products that were not as marketable they would not be in the public domain and these products would become lost. As stated in Lessig article “only 2% has work of any continuing commercial value. The copyright will not expire as long as congress is free to be bought to extend the term again.”
The problem with the copyright law is that old books will get lost because there is no way to determine who owns the copyright. Therefore, in this technological society where more and more people are using technology these books will become books of the past. In addition, as Lessig points out, the creativity will be lost. In addition, the opportunity to expand on a concept or idea will be diminished as no-one will have access to the books.
Lessig states 94% of the films and books published between 1923 and 1946 will not be available because there is no way to find out the owner.
Lessig proposed that in an effort to establish some balance, copyright owners should pay a small fee after the copyright has been in effect for 50 years. This proposal would require copyright owners to pay a small fee to register their work. If they did not pay the fee the work would be pass to the public domain.
Lessig, Lawrence: Free Culture, Penguin Press, 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)