Wikipedia and QA

I’ve been following the arguments about the quality of Wikipedia entries and came on this thoughtful post by Ethan Zuckerman. Excerpt:

When I use Wikipedia to research technical topics, I generally have a positive experience, frequently finding information I would be unlikely to find in any other context, generally resolving my technical questions – “How does the GSM cellphone standard work?” with a single search. When I use Wikipedia to obtain information that I could find in a conventional encyclopedia, I often have a terrible experience, encountering articles that are unsatisfying at best and useless at worst. Generally, these experiences result from a search where I already know a little about a topic and am looking for additional, specific information, usually when I’m researching a city or a nation to provide context for a blog entry. My current operating hypothesis? Wikipedia is a fantastic reference work for stuff that doesn’t exist in other reference works, and a lousy knock-off of existing works when they do exist.

Old media and the Net

The most interesting question is not whether Friends Reunited will save ITV, but if ITV will destroy Friends Reunited. That depends on the extent to which Allen and his management team leave their acquisition alone.

Television people are constitutionally incapable of dealing with the web because they have been socially and professionally conditioned in the world of ‘push’ media with its attendant control freakery and inbuilt assumptions about the passivity and stupidity of audiences. Very little of their experience or skills are useful in a ‘pull’ medium like the web, where the consumer is active, fickle and informed, and history to date suggests that if they are put in charge of internet operations they screw up.

My guess is that Allen & Co will not be able to resist the temptation to meddle with their new toy…

Outsourcing fantasy

Hmmm… One of those stories you don’t know whether to believe or not. The NYT is solemnly reporting that affluent online gamers who lack the time and patience to work their way up to the higher levels of gamedom are willing to pay young Chinese to play the early rounds for them. Excerpt:

Every day, in 12-hour shifts, they “play” computer games by killing onscreen monsters and winning battles, harvesting artificial gold coins and other virtual goods as rewards that, as it turns out, can be transformed into real cash…

“For 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, my colleagues and I are killing monsters,” said a 23-year-old gamer who works here in this makeshift factory and goes by the online code name Wandering. “I make about $250 a month, which is pretty good compared with the other jobs I’ve had. And I can play games all day.”

DIY Sabotage Manual — CIA version

Intriguing Flickr slideshow of a sabotage manual allegedly produced by the CIA in the 1980s for anyone interested in destabilising the Nicaraguan government. Helpful advice such as:

BURN THE LOCAL POLICE STATION!
1. Fill a narrow-necked bottle with petrol, kerosene or other burnable liquid. If possible, add shredded soap or sawdust…

It’s a bit dated, of course, but still….

Other suggestions include:

  • Threaten the boss. Phone in false fire alarms and bomb threats!
  • Leave lights on and taps running.
  • Don’t maintain vehicles and machines.
  • Obstruct roads with trees, rocks or ditches!
  • Disable car batteries.
  • Cut the cables of telephones and alarm systems!
  • Make BIG explosions!

    This last suggestion is clearly popular with disaffected Iraqis.

    Er, it has to be a spoof — doesn’t it? After all the US government is committed to upholding the rule of law and spreading democracy everywhere.

  • Ambiguous domain names

    Quentin has a nice link to an amusing site which collects domain names that are unintentionally funny. Example: an organisation with the perfectly respectable name of Experts Exchange, but the URL www.expertsexchange.com. And then there is the pen specialist, Pen Island. I leave you to imagine the URL.

    Words as weapons

    Although the content of the speech was highly political, especially in its clinical dissection of post-war US foreign policy, it relied on Pinter’s theatrical sense, in particular his ability to use irony, rhetoric and humour, to make its point. This was the speech of a man who knows what he wants to say but who also realises that the message is more effective if rabbinical fervour is combined with oratorical panache.

    At one point, for instance, Pinter argued that “the United States supported and in many cases engendered every rightwing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the second world war”. He then proceeded to reel off examples. But the clincher came when Pinter, with deadpan irony, said: “It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening, it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest.” In a few sharp sentences, Pinter pinned down the willed indifference of the media to publicly recorded events. He also showed how language is devalued by the constant appeal of US presidents to “the American people”. This was argument by devastating example. As Pinter repeated the lulling mantra, he proved his point that “The words ‘the American people’ provide a truly voluptuous cushion of reassurance.” Thus Pinter brilliantly used a rhetorical device to demolish political rhetoric.

    Michael Billington, writing in the Guardian on Harold Pinter’s Nobel Lecture, delivered from a wheelchair.

    Lovely phrase that — “voluptuous cushion of reassurance”. Must remember it.