The Truth According To Wikipedia

Please refrain from drawing quotes into the air, especially when there are not appropriate. A library is a library, not a "library".

wiki is great, sure if you an uninformed and dont know about citations then fine, but wiki is like the giant directory of knowledge, if you really want to find out about the subject then follow up citations, consider the source, for example if its politics and you follow the citation to a page by the guardian newspaper, expect a leftwards slant, same deal with FOX news for rightwards slant, all these people saying "dont trust wiki" annoy me, its kind of insulting to our intellegence.

oh god the speech at the beginning makes this dude seem like such a cunt

the truth doesn't exist at all, if we have an agreement, that will be our truth, we build the truth

Obviously you shouldn't just read anything or trust anything you read, critical thinking can help you in that department. It should also be obvious that anything you read is subject to the viewpoints of its author (book or internet). Even if you have something that is objectively true theres always presenting information in a light favoring you views or omitting information.

My point is that in any situation on the internet all the problems that apply for books can be equally true while losing some of advantages of books like structure and global overview.

I'm not saying that wikipedia cannot provide an in-depth view on anything, I'm just saying that choosing a good book can provide you with more extensive information than a wikipedia article while not having to check every author and reference. Just checking one author and reading critically is enough for a book.

Web 2.0 is a joke. Its a term used so some ass can claim his doctorate.
I've been in the web industry since its inception, there is no MAJOR revision of the web paradigm since its start. These new wave yuppies can keep your Volkswagon, overpriced coffee, macbook, and web 2.0.
Idiots.
Dont waste your time with this video.

is this supposed to be funny?

people who don't realise that books are just as trustible as wikipedia... just makes me LOL

Is anyone planning on informing Mr. Keen of how purely ironic it is that his interview is being screened on the internet, specifically on youtube? Or, for that matter, how hypocritical?