[nSLUG] Wikipedia (Was: "Cat5e vs Cat6")
ak621 at chebucto.ns.ca
Wed Nov 4 11:37:21 AST 2009
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:31:00 -0400 (AST)
> Richard Bonner <ak621 at chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:
>> *** I agree. However, I believe that the true price has not yet
>> been revealed, and I believe that price will be a negative one in too
>> many instances.
> When it is finally revealed, you can resurrect this thread and say "I
> told you so".
*** Well, I'd be pleased if Why?-Ki attains the accuracy and
reliability of a Britannica. In the meantime, too many negative
experiences have tainted my trust in that system.
> Until then, I remain skeptical of your predictions,
> which seem to be based on so much air.
*** Well, they are based on what I see with literacy and educational
levels today. More and more is based on popular media and less on
traditional sources headed by educated overseers.
Now please realise that I am not dissing every article on Why?-Ki.
Many are well researched and well written. It is those that are not
*and* are also not being corrected. There must be put in place a
better system of checks and balances.
>> Again, my problem is that too much of the public *will* believe
>> what is written there as the truth.
> And too much of the public will believe urban myths forwarded by
> their friends and family. So? What of it? Educate people how to
> use the best tools we have at our disposal rather than slagging
> those tools as being fatally flawed because they are "uncontrolled".
*** I think you are exaggerating my stance. My point is that the
potential for the flaw to be detrimental is at this time, too great.
I am not against such resources, but I want to see better control from
more educated persons.
Otherwise I agree completely that the public needs to be educated
regarding usage of the tools at hand and be educated in how to think
To that end, I have a friend that is in this field. He follows in
the steps of persons such as James Randi, a Canadian magician that
exposes scams, among other things. My friend has been interviewed on
radio and I believe on Internet media, as well. He has a new website,
called "Skeptricks". It is just being developed, but I believe it will
be teaching persons how to critically evaluate concepts and even
typical scams being perpetrated upon the public. I don't have the URL,
but will get it and publish it here.
> The same public that is susceptible to believing every Wikipedia at
> face value is also susceptible to using Britannica with an
> uncritical eye.
*** True, but I would tend to trust Britannica over the current
state of Why?-Ki.
> The answer to inaccuracies fed to us via the media
> / Internet is not to "unplug". It's called critical thinking.
*** I couldn't agree more, Ben.
More information about the nSLUG