What stops a WikiPedia entry from being "amateurish,
out-of-date, deliberately false, propaganda, misleading etc" ?
The problem is very much present and growing.
I am also interested in knowing what mechanism is not vulnerable to
being swayed by the aforementioned "baddies" of information.
Collaboration is what I can think of now, but that still has its
flaws.
New information is generally presented in n>1 way. Can technology make
statistical judgements on sources, content and accuracy without being
vulnerable to falsified data?
Just some thoughts.
Narkie.
On Aug 30, 9:03 pm, Roedy Green <see_webs...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> The more information there is, the harder it is to find the piece you
> want. Further the more people you have capable of creating
> information, the more junk information pollutes the pool, amateurish,
> out-of-date, deliberately false, propaganda, misleading etc.
>
> The global information pool is growing at quite a clip. What sort of
> technologies will we need to deal with it when that pool is 1000 times
> larger than today?
>
> Seems to me we will need ways of electronically coming to consensus on
> various matters, perhaps the WikiPedia is the next model.
> --
> Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
> The Java Glossaryhttp://mindprod.com
|
