[lotuseclat79]

Article here.

Open-source information gathering can rival, if not surpass, the clandestine intelligence produced by government agencies.

-- Tom

 

[Teck]

Wikipedia is great. Anyone here who says otherwize is a idiot.

 

[Stoner]

It's good as a general source. But as it's subject to manipulation by interested parties of the topic, it is subject to influences that prevent it from being used as a primary quotable source, imo.
For example, the article on Tony Robbins has been sanitized. Look to the influence the Robbins legal team is reported to have had under the discussion tab.
What's there may not be incorrect, but so much has been removed and edited that it is an incorrect image of the man, his character and his business.

 

[Izme]

It's good as a general source. But as it's subject to manipulation by interested parties of the topic, it is subject to influences that prevent it from being used as a primary quotable source, imo.
For example, the article on Tony Robbins has been sanitized. Look to the influence the Robbins legal team is reported to have had under the discussion tab.
What's there may not be incorrect, but so much has been removed and edited that it is an incorrect image of the man, his character and his business.

no dark corner - no stone unturned - no closet know to man has the ability to Escape this singularity

Tony Robbinsaphobia

 

[teengeekgrrl]

I adore Wikipedia completely and absolutely. While I do agree that it is indeed subject to bias on political articles, I find it a great source for historical information and things of that nature. I've got a binder full of wikipedia articles on history I've printed out, no kididng.

 

[Gabriel]

TGG.....Happy to find out I am not the only one that has half of cyber-space on paper

 

[teengeekgrrl]

Lol It's so much nicer to put it in a nice binder and read it than to space out in front of the screen reading it.

 

[Shamou]

no dark corner - no stone unturned - no closet know to man has the ability to Escape this singularity

Tony Robbinsaphobia

Yup... and Stoner has a real bad case of it... :up:

.

 

[Izme]

Yup... and Stoner has a real bad case of it... :up:

.

either that or Tony Robbins ASSfixeeya

 

[Stoner]

Unfortunately, it's been a common criticism.
I just happened to stumble on the extreme when reviewing how Robbins was presented after his legal team got involved.
An illusion............. much like the chiropractor of TSG

 

[Stoner]

Hey fish

 

[katonca]

I really haven't used the site much. Is it true that information can be added to a subject by everyday users? If that's the case how can the truth be held valid?

 

[Izme]

Hey fish

heya Jack

I like wikipedia...it's a good source for information

 

[Gabriel]

Lol It's so much nicer to put it in a nice binder and read it than to space out in front of the screen reading it.

yeah...now all I need is a device to read pages I want, and put voice to them so I can listen with my eyes closed, and into dreamland......that would make me very happy...non-interupted informational gadget

 

[Stoner]

Hi fish, Gabriel

I like Wikipedia , also. It's just good to know there are sometimes influences that can alter perception of the content.

 

[Gabriel]

Hi fish, Gabriel

I like Wikipedia , also. It's just good to know there are sometimes influences that can alter perception of the content.

Hi Jack

Yes, I agree. I would want to know where info is derived from, and how it is collected and assembled so that I coud shift the degree of buying into, or basing conclusions on what I read. Yes, the influences that alter and arrange things, are only fair if they are stated as being that.

Kinda like firewalking....you leave the science out, and replace it with abba-dabba.....that would flat p... me off, especially if I found out later that those facts were conveniently left out, and pseudo-magic filled in to take its place....I would not be a happy camper...(pun definitely intended)

 

[Rockn]

This is quoted from their own site:
"allowing most of its articles to be edited by almost anyone with access to the Web site."
Why would anyone use this as a source of information for anything? I hate wikis....whatever they are. That is wiki wiki whack yo!

 

[lotuseclat79]

Here's a new Wikipedia related link: Researchers Use Wikipedia To Make Computers Smarter here.

Using Wikipedia, Technion researchers have developed a way to give computers knowledge of the world to help them "think smarter," making common sense and broad-based connections between topics just as the human mind does. The new method will help computers filter e-mail spam, perform Web searches and even conduct intelligence gathering at more sophisticated levels than current programs.

-- Tom