Intelligence in Wikipedia

[IQ20000Berta]

use this structures finding methods to build bridges in the future, maybe it is possible

[la5tadivision]

the noob's encyclopedia (Wikipedia)

[PythonandFelidae]

@NPRCVI

“In 1997 Hawking and ... Kip Thorne (the wormhole scientist) made a bet with ... John Preskill. Hawking and Thorne maintained that the information that entered a black hole was lost, and any computation that might occur inside the black hole, useful or otherwise, could never be transmitted outside of it, whereas Preskill maintained that the information could be recovered.97 The loser was to give the winner some useful information in the form of an encyclopedia.”

[wikipedosuk]

What intelligence?it ought2b called WIKISTUPIDIA IT ALREADY IS Hoy how FUKIN DARE U SAY PIECE OF shit PeDOS LOADED WIT CHiLD RAPISTS R good?SHAMEFUL SCUM.BOOKMARK PRINT GIVE ALL ON WIKIPEDIA-WaTCH ORG RULES LOL THE MORE PEDOS DEAD THE MORE WORLD IS SAFER!EAT SHIT WIKIPEDO WIKIDIOTS SCUM ETERNAL WASTE hypoCRYTES! Curent WIKIPEDIA I MEAN WIKIPEDOIA LL NOT LAST LONG! Idiots WHO SPONSOR THIS SHIT R WIKIPEDo WIKIDIOTS!SHAME JAKOFS!

[yoyohooyo]

Wikipedia is not a reliable source because packs of hostile editors/administrators gain control of the articles and they spin the articles to their liking. I believe some of these editors/administrators are being paid by people that need propaganda.

[ExoticCalli]

For the most part it is a TERRIBLE resource for information.

Recently I came across several wikipedia write-ups with racial slurs and blatant lies and misinformation, one writer even admitting to the fact that his comments about an ethnic group's relgious persuasion were an opinion.

What legimate resouce permits racial slurs?

It is not acceptable that an individual's opinions and falsehoods regarding history and NOT actual historical facts are permitted on wikipedia and passed of as fact.

[cilibinarii]

@ExoticCalli Mostly racist/biased content is removed, but not everything can be reviewed instantly all the time. There is also the rule that as many things as possible need sources, so unsourced statements that should have some way of proving their validity are often deleted too. But its editors aren't omnipotent, they can't always look at every new edit. So mistakes are bound to sneak in.

[gilbertrivas17]

holy shit!? am i the only who thinks this is a very long video, 51 minutes? damn i didnt even there some videos on youtube that long.

[Dorfkanal]

How a green party activist inside Wikipedia abused his admin rights to manipulate thousands of articles in order to remove critical viewpoints about man-made global warming:

bit (dot) ly / 5CMOGi

[moutimouti1]

the most important thing in the internet is Wikipedia i hope everyone donate anything just to keep it going plz... price of Vodka bottle :D

[WikiMotion]

Please support WikiMotion!

We are trying to create the largest video library for WikiMedia! Check our our channel and subscribe!

Thanks,

the WikiMotion Team

[t0d51]

fangirl (noun) a female, usually between the ages of 12 and 19, that is obsessed with a particular fictional character and, in turn, the actor that portrays said character. avoid fangirls in large groups, as they do tend to swarm, and if you are unlucky enough to catch them near their object of admiration, cover your ears. they have a batlike shriek that can be heard from several city blocks away. all young actors beware. (see also: stalker in training)

[b0bd0le101]

<3

I flipping luff youu! I'm taking that, memorising it, and reciting it to every flaming Twilight fan that I know.

[7jackson7michigan7]

lol i got blocked from wikped because i listed a game by MILTON BRADLEY- a real game what the h---milty wont reply and wilped wont either lol----------- just check the vid---wow real bad game.

[Mescalinamiamor]

coooool

[Chilloutman33]

Did you ever think like: WHO THE HELL CARES ABOUT THAT?

[tylerfrankling]

1 in every 365 people can say that aswell...

[geppebrillo]

this is a big mistake, wilipendia is not affordable at all.

[Rotten194]

@geppe

Says the guy who cant spell for shit. I would really trust YOU to tell me what information to use, asshole.

[geppebrillo]

dear rottenass, first of all is better to use nothing then an not at all affordable source leaded by nerds and politicized admins. second, google uses efficient spiders and have no needs to being supported by wikishittia that is evidently an unsuccessful experiment.

are you an adminerd of wikignominia?

[pandemicpwnsn00bs]

i feel sorry for you if the mis-spelling of words invalidates information. YOur opinion makes your come as very ignorant. Bitch

[vanderbilt887]

can't

[IamDickee]

As a former Ivy league "A" student, I have had more bad luck trying to actually understand the content of Wiki's ever growing database. I think the Wiki rag tag bag of volunteers need to create more harmonious organization of content. For example, try understanding the "importance of bees" and pollination, and you'll find yourself standing in a parking lot full of confusion. I had to surf a few other simple sites for better explanation.

[Xobunoli]

I understand it just fine.

[boredman443]

You had to look up the importance of bees in pollination and you're criticizing the credibility of wikipedia?

[IamDickee]

HUH? Wikipedia is a mess; compare against other directories. It may the largest, but its not the best source of information. Have you ever collaborated with 12 other people on a term paper? Imagine the mess.....

[boredman443]

But seriously, why would you need to look up how bees pollinate plants? That's what I was saying.

[sw3d3nlol]

well youre a very bored man so you gotta do something.

[Bolenderable]

I agree. I just revised a Wikipedia article today. I am sure the information I added was right, but what was alarming was that I could do it so easily. I could have written *anything* and it would have been added to the entry at least temporarily.

[simpsonsguy22]

everytime i read wikipedia on even the most complicated of subjects, i end up fully understanding it. wikipedia explains concisely.

[phmfthacim]

this is excellent

[NPRCVI]

"The loser was to give the winner some useful information in the form of an encyclopedia." From the book The Singularity is Near." ISBN 0-14-303788-9

[fabbio8888]

Hey, go and check Black Holes, then you tell me if there is Intelligence there.

Wiki is linked ti GOOGLE EARTH, who knows why, but it's enough to suspect interest in saying good things about Wiki. Propaganda. Pure propaganda.

[Flintingstone]

Wikipedia is an unreliable source of information.

[mic24oni]

no, it is reliable.

[Raffaello9]

like all encyclopedias, it's not a reliable source. Read the disclaimer on the site.

[ourben]

One encyclopaedia is never enough, even if it's collaborative, because the last edit is always committed by one person.

[phmfthacim]

every source of information is "unreliable"

[BidwellRunner]

@phmfthacim

Chuck Norris is a reliable source

[javierneptuno]

@BidwellRunner totaly agree, Chuck Norris is a serious thing

[3818116]

Excellent talk!

It occurs to me that rather than using as an example knowledge domain "authors", one wonders whether this Internet information extraction technology would perform better in a knowledge domain like "open source software", where the boundaries of the domain and community of knowledge consumers are naturally better defined.

Google Tech Talks rock.

[crimsoncoin]

Thanks for posting video, GoogleTech, Wiki is a boon.