Slashdot Mirror


Squeezing a Wikipedia Snapshot Onto an 8GB iPhone

blackbearnh writes with this excerpt from O'Reilly Radar "Think about Wikipedia, what some consider the most complete general survey of human knowledge we have at the moment. Now imagine squeezing it down to fit comfortably on an 8GB iPhone. Sound daunting? Well, that's just what Patrick Collison's Encyclopedia iPhone application does. App Store purchasers of Collison's open source application can browse and search the full text of Wikipedia when stuck in a plane, or trapped in the middle of nowhere (or, as defined by AT&T coverage...)"

169 comments

  1. Survey of Human Knowledge? by benwiggy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "Wikipedia, what some consider the most complete general summary of human knowledge we have at the moment."

    There. Fixed that for you.

    1. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [citation needed]

    2. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Wikipedia, what some consider the most complete general summary of human knowledge[citation needed] we have at the moment."

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by mikael_j · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In all seriousness, I'm starting to get extremely annoyed by what is IMHO flagrant abuse of the [citation needed] tag on Wikipedia, I don't know how many times I've seen it used in situations where it just wasn't needed. And I don't mean in "But anyone who spends all day working on FOO knows that BAR!" situations but more along the lines of "The earth orbits the sun[citation needed]." or even better "Sir NameOfArticle was in his day frequently regarded as a national hero in $COUNTRY.[citation needed]. <Six paragraphs that detail, with plenty of sources, exactly how famous Sir NameOfArticle was.>".

      I've actually begun wondering if maybe there are certain individuals who are deliberately trolling Wikipedia by adding [citation needed] in places where it just doesn't belong and then sit around giggling as they read the discussion pages of various articles they've messed with.

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    4. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Wikipedia, what some[who?] consider the most complete general summary of human knowledge[citation needed] we have at the moment."

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

    5. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by larry+bagina · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It also seems completely random and arbitrary. If they need citations, then they need citations on every sentence/idea/paragraph that isn't general knowledge. Maybe a bot goes though and randomly adds them.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    6. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wikipedia, what some consider the most complete general summary of human knowledge we have at the moment."

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you. :-)

    7. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by machine321 · · Score: 1

      "Wikipedia, what some[who?] consider the most complete general summary of human knowledge[citation needed] we have at the moment."

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

    8. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a bot goes though and randomly adds them.

      [citation needed]

      Am I doing it right?

    9. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by oneirophrenos · · Score: 1

      If they need citations, then they need citations on every sentence/idea/paragraph that isn't general knowledge.

      I think that's a good viewpoint. Now, I am all for Wikipedia and have on many occasions found it to be of paramount value, but there is no way anyone in their right mind should trust an "encyclopedia anyone can edit". The way I see it, Wikipedia is a collection of sources, and WP articles function mainly as summaries of those sources. No-one should accept anything that's written in WP without checking where the information came from, and that's why everything that doesn't fall under common knowledge should be referenced - even if that means long reference sections and a superscripted number after every sentence.

    10. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 0

      Well on /. it seems to get used a lot by people who want to disagree with you but can't find any way to do that in a way that doesn't make them look bad so they try to cast doubt on what you are saying, or waste your time, by asking for pointless "citations".

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    11. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by dimeglio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Look, this is how it works: I'm asked to find out what COBIT is. Naturally, I google it and find a hit in Wikipedia. From there, I get a fairly comprehensive idea of what it might be - with external links that I don't bother to click. I then explain to the team what COBIT is and tie it in with our business objectives. The team then might want to investigate further or get certification if it is a requirement for the job.

      Now, I'm not sure what you mean by trust. I do trust that the information I gathered on COBIT is as accurate as I needed it to be at that time. Now, if I am an MD and need to prescribe a drug to a patient, I certainly would not trust Wikipedia for the dosage. I'd look it up in a medical reference on that medication and published by the drug company.

      So for 90% of decisions, IMO Wikipedia is no worse than using last year's edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    12. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by leenks · · Score: 1

      Why is this any different than any other encyclopedia, or any other source for that matter?

    13. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's crappier, with less reliability, horrible editing mistakes, and is utterly worthless.

    14. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Douchebags ? On my Wikipedia ?

      SURELY YOU JEST!

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    15. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "[[Wikipedia]], what some[who?] consider[weasel words] the most complete general summary of [[human knowledge]][which?][citation needed] we[who?] have at the moment[weasel words]."

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

      There. Fixed that for you.

    16. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You win, sir

    17. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [citation needed]

      Seriously though, it's a really useful meme to tap in the middle of a debate. It's a reminder that those who seek to convince must bring evidence, and that anyone can post anything they like. When used to tag a claim that a) is very unexpected or counterintuitive, b) should be citable, and c) is central to the opponent's argument, then demand the citation. If it's tangential or a matter of opinion, then yeah, it's bastardish.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    18. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK. You are an idiot. Seriously, don't use [citation needed] unless you have at least the most basic idea of what it means.

    19. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      For the most part I agree with you. I do find occasions like the following occur though:

      Me: Well XYZ.
      Them: citation needed!!!

      Now XYZ is usually something I have read in the past and, like most people, I haven't memorized the source in case I need it 5 years down the road. Sometimes I may remember the general agency but not exactly when etc. I don't consider it my duty to do someone else's research for them. I'm putting out what I know from my experience, research etc. and if the person wants to make use of that then they are welcome to and if they don't that really doesn't bother me at all. The latter bit tends to freak some people out or piss them off or both. Usually if the person has been polite etc. then I try to give as much information to help them as I can. But if they have been rude or my "this is a zealot" detector goes off then I tell them to look for themselves if they are genuinely interested.

      Now if XYZ were something like "Obviously the speed of light is a local constraint and a simple warping of the time-space continuum will allow information transfer at >C." then yeah, I'd expect to provide either some logic or a citation or both.

      And sometimes you know it's just plain pointless right away, as in:
      Me: You are a bigot.
      Them: No I'm not.
      Me: Do you discriminate against people based on any of: sex, race etc.?
      Them: Yes - but I think it's justified!
      Me: Then you are a bigot.
      Them: No I'm not!
      Me: go look it up, bye bye, have a nice life, cya...

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    20. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      [citation needed] is really the only good defense against weasel words. All one editor that doesn't agree with another can do (that doesn't involve an edit war) is to ask for greater and greater clarification.

      Which after a certain point becomes pretty weaselly in and of itself.

      (I am not a frequent WP editor and there's a lot about WP that I can't f-n stand. But I think at this point everything noteworthy that could be said about the pros and cons of 'crowdsourcing' the editing of an encyclopedia has been said already, so I'm going to resist getting into it here.)

    21. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by atraintocry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If there is a pattern, it's that the person who put [citation needed] didn't necessarily agree with the preceding statement, but either (a) didn't want it to turn into a conflict or (b) didn't feel like doing the research and (perhaps rightly) decided that the person making the claim should do it.

      I think that in the aggregate they turn the tone of WP into something that's very passive-aggressive. But individually they are harmless, just pointing out the obvious ("here is a statement that is unverified").

      Where I see lots of [citation needed]s is in articles that tend to be biographical or concerning an artistic work or work of entertainment. Average Pop Star's #1 fan will copy a bunch of stuff from APS-fan-forums.org and someone else will come along and think, "what is all of this (crummy) original research doing here?"

      If they deleted the material, other forum members will keep reverting. But if they add [cn], most people know that if they're going to remove that tag then they'd better have a citation handy.

      Obviously in very popular or contentious articles, they don't stay there as long, because more people are willing to go out and find citations that match their point of view. The only way to trump someone you disagree with in WP-land is by finding more evidence. Which is exactly how it should be. So despite their passive-aggressive side, I tend to see the [cn] as a sign that the system is working somewhat, albeit slowly.

      But seriously I'd nuke half of the articles on WP if I had the authority. WP can take page views away from a site that actually *is* accurate. And there's still copy-paste jobs going on. A WP article, by virtue of being able to draw from multiple sources and have multiple editors, should be more accurate than the sources it draws from. When it's not, it does people a disservice since it's going to show up first in Google whether or not it's any good.

    22. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by mopower70 · · Score: 1

      I think that's a good viewpoint. Now, I am all for open source and have on many occasions found it to be of paramount value, but there is no way anyone in their right mind should trust "source code anyone can edit".

      There. Does that read any differently?

    23. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by orngjce223 · · Score: 1

      Oddly, physicians *do* use Wikipedia as well as, or to supplement, a desk reference. The only good thing about this is that they also edit it more often than the general public does if said material is wrong. I'd find the study, but I don't want to spend the time to do that right now - much like the same reason most of Wikipedia's articles remain unreferenced.

      --
      Note: I was 13 when I wrote most of this. Take with several grains of salt.
    24. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In case you haven't noticed, there are no significant open source applications with source code anyone can edit (and have their modifications distributed with the original). They're all "benevolent dictator" type of operations. Real power is limited to one person only.

      But don't let facts fly in the face of your "liberalism solves everything" fantasies. After all, they wouldn't last one second after what happened in Iran in any rational person, neither would 99% of any "liberal" (heh) belief.

      But then you also have people who voted for Obambi. You must be totally bonkers for that one ...

      Wikipedia shares a property, of course, with all "shining examples of liberalism" like Venezuela or North Korea : it's a dictatorship, extremely illiberal and ZERO tolerance for alternate viewpoints (just try it. Insert a seriously different opinion about any topic in there, see what happens, and anyone can see just how "NPOV" many articles are, like the one on Chavez for example). But liberals will claim the pages about a certain "Jim Wales" (and others) are accurate anyway (including certain sponsors). Can't have truth "oppress" their beliefs now, can we.

      I guess democrats now have to deal with the truth : Bush liberated Iraq, and Obambi utterly destroyed what little hope Iranians had.

      Ok sorry you can stop laughing now. Democrats and "dealing with truth". I get it. Not going to happen. Please stop laughing.

    25. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about Wikipedia, what some consider the most complete general survey of human knowledge we have at the moment.

      Excuse me while I BARF.

    26. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by sycodon · · Score: 1

      And I bet there is some troll living in his momma's basement editing the physicians edits.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    27. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by RaymondKurzweil · · Score: 0

      I've actually begun wondering if maybe there are certain individuals who are deliberately trolling Wikipedia by adding [citation needed] in places where it just doesn't belong and then sit around giggling as they read the discussion pages of various articles they've messed with.

      Yes. I add them. I also remove them. Another fun thing is adding the [who?] weasel word tag, and notability. I also take certain acronyms and point them to porn titles on the Wiki (they are not scrutinized as much).

      Wikipedia is a piece of shit, it is nothing more than an MMORPG that takes itself way too seriously.

      You realize that there are people on there that do this shit for some passive-aggressive power-play. But there are those (me at least) that just do it for relaxation. My political alliance is simply the one that is against everyone else on Wikipedia, no exceptions.

      Why should I give a shit anyway?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism

    28. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Citation needed?

      Seriously though - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Common_knowledge . Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:You_don't_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:You_do_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue for alternate viewpoints on this issue.

      But if someone replaces the citation needed tag with a reference, even if you consider it unnecessary, why is that bad?

      "Sir NameOfArticle was in his day frequently regarded as a national hero in $COUNTRY.[citation needed]. ".

      And that's wrong how exactly? You're seriously suggesting that a weasel worded point of view about someone being a national hero should be better off supplied without references? That's precisely the sort of thing that does need sourcing. And even if you think it doesn't, how on earth does more references make it worse (note, the six paragraphs of explanation can be placed in the footnote, so this wouldn't break the flow of the actual text). The point of an encyclopedia is to be an encyclopedia. If you want unsupported opinions without references or explanation, go read a tabloid.

    29. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Citation needed.

    30. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      What I was talking about with the national hero bit was when you have an article about said national hero and lots of text (with source references) detailing just what a hero he/she was considered in his/her day yet somehow someone manages to pop in a few [citation needed] in the first few paragraphs even though there are plenty of sources, just not in that particular sentence (which is essentially just part of the beginning of a much longer text that, once again, cites countless sources).

      The main reason this started to annoy me was that I spent a couple of hours reading about various historical figures the other day and noticed that this sort of abuse, yes I consider it abuse, of the [citation needed] tag seemed to pop up here and there.

      My only explanations for it are that either someone is doing it just to be annoying or it's some user who only bothered reading the first paragraph before going "OMG NO SOURCES I MUST DEMAND THEM IMMEDIATELY!".

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    31. Re:Survey of Human Knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for that idea. Now I'll have something to do when I'm bored.

  2. Nice! by GreenTech11 · · Score: 1
    Now I can get lost in the mass of links wherever I go! Life's Good

    Well, I could if I had an iPhone, sounds like an impressive achievement though, but how much space do you have left over after it?

    --
    Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
    1. Re:Nice! by Starayo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The filesize of the app is about 2GB. Pretty amazing!

      I'd be grabbing it right now if I didn't only have ~350MB of free space left on my iPhone...

      Would be a great app for iPod Touch users.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Nice! by JordanL · · Score: 1

      All that porn is taking up a lot of space...

    3. Re:Nice! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1, Troll

      I'd be grabbing it right now if I didn't only have ~350MB of free space left on my iPhone...

      So stick a bigger SD card in it already.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    4. Re:Nice! by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Informative

      So stick a bigger SD card in it already.

      He can't, can you just loan him your mobile SD capable device that can run the app?

      Oh that's right...

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:Nice! by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Sometimes an encyclopedia app you'll use once a year is less important than the pocket space you save every day by giving up expandability.

      That said, it would be pretty nice to have an iPod or iPhone with an SD slot. But just regarding the music player side...the players that mix storage either don't use a database or make you wish you hadn't turned it on. And while I know and understand the virtues of having your music files nicely organized in a system you devised yourself, as my music drive climbs towards 100GB I am realizing that screwing around with folders, even though a lot of it's scripted, just takes time away from doing more important things, one of which is actually listening to the stuff. Rockbox has served me well, but I may go with iTunes/iPod soon just so I can spare myself the work. And since AFAIK with iTunes the db is generated on the host machine, being able to add and remove storage from the player without syncing might make things pretty messy.

      The trend with Apple, post-Macintosh seems to have always been towards less user expandability. But the approach has its benefits sometimes. My computer I don't mind messing around with. My phone I expect to "just work."

    6. Re:Nice! by Starayo · · Score: 1

      It is, actually! I have a feeling the software I used to convert it didn't compress it properly.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:Nice! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Please explain the connection between lack of expandability and a nice database.

      Correlation is not causation.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    8. Re:Nice! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      He can't, can you just loan him your mobile SD capable device that can run the app?

      Oh that's right...

      What's "right" exactly?

      That this open source app could be ported to many mobile SD capable devices? Like many smartphones for example?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    9. Re:Nice! by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      If you can make changes to the storage between syncs (or if you're not syncing to a host machine at all) then the database has to be built and indexed on the player, which takes longer. A *lot* longer, which is why I don't use it with Rockbox.

      My friend had a Cowon that did something similar and he had nothing good to say about it. He also eventually went the iPod + Rockbox route.

      My larger point was that although I generally make sure that gear is open/hackable before I buy it, there are certain things that I appreciate not having to mess with. My phone for one, and as time goes on I am thinking my music player as well. Just a personal preference. I have a few MP3 players but they are all collecting dust because I just don't have time to go through skins, write scripts to sync files, etc.

  3. iPhone apps for computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will somebody please build a emulator for iPhone apps!

    It's a shame to have all this development go wasted on a rather expensive and fragile device with a huge monthly cost.

    Thank you!

    1. Re:iPhone apps for computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a pity this very important concern has to be voiced as an AC for fear of Apple-lash. But AC, I am pretty sure once enough development has been achieved, someone will develop an emulator (if it doesn't exist already) and all will be well.

    2. Re:iPhone apps for computers by Filip22012005 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That problem has recently been solved. With the recent addition of sms-sharing, you could use any iPhone remotely.

      --
      When the policeman of the tie, rule you violate, hello punishment of the kitty?
    3. Re:iPhone apps for computers by FlyingBishop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      FTFA:

      But I released the code to this application; it was open source from the very start. So it was pretty easy for them to take it and to port it to the OLPC.

      Already done.

      However, I'm not sure that I want precisely what this iPhone app is. It strips out references, and from the sound of things also the discussion pages. I'd say about 1/2 of articles I check the discussion pages to see what's really going on. Also he says he strips a lot of the metadata, and obviously images, none of which are things I"d want to give up (some of the metadata might be superfluous, but if I'm copying Wikipedia onto my computer, I want to copy Wikipedia onto my computer.)

      I understand there are licensing issues with images, but even so, the SVG ought to be safe. And that wouldn't add as much of a disk space hit as the gifs, etc.

      One of the other issues is the timing of Wikipedia dumps. They only do text-only dumps, and according to the article they only happen once every few months. It would be nice to implement an image review policy, and figure out a way to allow for mirrors (or just some increased bandwidth at Wikipedia HQ) so that we can actually have the entire English Wikipedia, regularly snapshotted and compressed, available for download. And really, for that kind of thing a 3-month or even yearly turnaround would be well worth the wait.

    4. Re:iPhone apps for computers by A12m0v · · Score: 1

      Then get an iPod touch. Apple is giving them away with every new Mac, if you are eligible to an education discount.
      http://store.apple.com/us/browse/campaigns/back_to_school?cid=WWW-NAUS-BTS20090507-00032

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    5. Re:iPhone apps for computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're missing the point of this project, which is to fit it on an 8gb iPhone.
      Do you have any idea how much more overhead gets added by what you suggest? You are completely off-topic.

    6. Re:iPhone apps for computers by Starayo · · Score: 1

      The filesize of this app, as-is, is 2GB. I wonder how many images are on wikipedia.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:iPhone apps for computers by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Fragile? I have dropped my iPhone onto concrete three times from 5 feet up. I carry it all day at work and don't use any of the protectors. I treat it as I do any other phone. Fragile isn't a word I would use to describe it.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    8. Re:iPhone apps for computers by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      To be honest, what would probably be easier would be just hacking the emulator that already comes with the development tools to run any app at any time.

    9. Re:iPhone apps for computers by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, one of my colleagues dropped it to a floor from his desk. Now the screen is full of cracks.

      Anecdotal evidence goes both ways.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    10. Re:iPhone apps for computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pictures?

    11. Re:iPhone apps for computers by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Never made them - a PDA with a broken screen is nothing special. Got four of them somewhere in a drawer, three of them the same model (HTC Universal). That doesn't say though, that this device has got weak points - had a HTC Universal which I dropped from the cockpit of an Actros lorry strait down on asphalt and except of a scratch on the case nothing happened.

      As I said, anectodal evidence goes both ways.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  4. Images! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't live without the images!

    1. Re:Images! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Wikipedia not crazybitches.com, for God's sake!

      Some people never grow up!

  5. Not a Problem by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is easily doable.

    Once you trim the earth reference down to "Mostly harmless".

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    1. Re:Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Untrue. You have to leave out considerably more than the media. RTFA.

    2. Re:Not a Problem by Dishevel · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is easily doable.

      Once you trim the earth reference down to "Mostly harmless".

      What reason did you have for adding "Mostly"?

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    3. Re:Not a Problem by LifesABeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      And the words, "Don't Panic" should be easily viewable.

    4. Re:Not a Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really is easy. The complete wikipedia article download is 4.9GB. Which wouldn't require any skill to fit on an 8GB iPhone.

  6. What a total geek.... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Goes to foreign country - one that he has never visited before
    2. Doesn't have wireless access.
    3. Instead of wandering about the country he spends most of his time programming ("Then basically, I spent a significant fraction of my time there in Japan, again, in 2007 writing those applications") an application so he can look up stuff about the country he isn't spending much time actually visiting.

    I bow before you sir. Awesome.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    1. Re:What a total geek.... by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      Yeah, when I went to Nicaragua a few months back (to learn Spanish) I had to stop myself from digging into my WordPress blog to play around with the formatting and make things display nicely.

      I did end up spending a blog post talking about the difference between image scaling with sampling and image scaling by averaging pixels. It was curious how the difference would probably not be noticeable at home, but on the 8 year old laptop I was using, the averaging method took a good 10 seconds per image, while the sampling method was like 1 or 2.

    2. Re:What a total geek.... by pzs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're right that this guy has flown the geek flag pretty high here; however, at least it's to some useful purpose. There are all kinds of facts about a country that are quite hard to discover just wandering about in it, and Wikipedia would be the ideal candidate to answer them.

      Last time I went on holiday (to Australia) I came back with a dozen questions I wanted answering, just because I didn't have internet access while I was out there; Wikipedia access would answer many of these questions. Examples:

      • I heard that Beds Are Burning was about the Australian aborigines - I never knew this before and wanted to look up more details on it.
      • As a result of that, I wanted to know far more information about how well aborigines were integrated in Australia at the moment. Answer: badly, but again hard to find out just by wandering around in Australia and difficult to raise with a random Aussie.
      • Australia is experiencing a lot of drought at the moment, but while we in Sydney, it rained quite a few times. I wanted to know more about the drought and what parts of the country it was affecting.
      • ...

      I could answer these questions by going into an internet cafe, but this isn't always possible. A portable Wikipedia sounds like a great idea.

    3. Re:What a total geek.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting as AC because I don't feel like getting modded down, but it's quite obvious what happened here.

      1. Anime guy goes to Japan
      2. Anime guy is intimidated by the difference in the culture as he expected it (e.g. no one cares about his anime)
      3. Anime guy neither speaks nor attempts to learn Japanese. No one is impressed by his anime catchphrases
      4. Anime guy therefore has no friends. Is not "picked up" by other foreigner groups because of his awkardness (see anime)
      5. Anime guy spends his life in solitude programming, just like back home. Guess the change of environment couldn't alter his true self.

      Captcha: hermit. Amusingly fitting.

    4. Re:What a total geek.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/Anime guy/gaijin/

      Japanese are some of the worst xenophobes on the planet. And when they aren't busy doing that, they're busy using Google Earth to search for old social classes to discriminate against.

      Posting as AC because I don't even have an account here. Yes I am aware of the irony of calling an entire racial group xenophobic.

    5. Re:What a total geek.... by dbcad7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I go on vacation to a country like that, I will buy a travel guide. I also spend a great deal of time researching prior to traveling. Having Wikipedia available 24/7 would be nice if I went off the grid that I had planned, but not life changing. Wikipedia is not that great as a travel guide. It "might" cover some things to see, and rarely things to do, but is more geared towards questions like those you asked in your post. Those type of questions are easily answered later without taking anything away from your trip.. What good is it to you though if you visit a city that has a bar with mermaids swimming in a shark tank and the wiki entry tells you nothing about it ? .. sure you will know the annual rainfall, and population density.. but your going to be pissed when you meet someone later who's been there and asked you about the mermaid shark tank bar.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    6. Re:What a total geek.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find your use of the word "integrated" offensive.

  7. Oblig by TinBromide · · Score: 4, Funny

    xkcd comic reference

    Yeah, pretty much you're turning your iphone into a hitch hiker's guide to earth, or at least america and europe if you can manage to squeeze wiki-travel onto it.

    --
    Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
  8. Don't panic.!! by leuk_he · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Seen that, done that been Got the t-shirt in 1978

    1. Re:Don't panic.!! by Andr+T. · · Score: 1

      I was searching the coments to check if someone had already said that :)

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

  9. Another step closer by powerslave12r · · Score: 0, Redundant

    http://xkcd.com/548/ That day is here.

    --
    Real men read Slashdot articles at -1, bottom up.
    1. Re:Another step closer by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. The Kindle supports online access to Wikipedia, but this requires a network connection. The iPhone supports the same. A while ago someone created a cut-down version of Wikipedia which you could browse completely offline on the iLiad. It sounds like someone has ported this to the iPhone, and because it's now on the iPhone it's news.

      Putting Wikipedia snapshots on portable devices is interesting. I don't really see why you'd do it with an iPhone; the iLiad takes CF cards, so you can just keep a 16GB CF card for Wikipedia and not fill up space you'd otherwise use for something else, but the iPhone's storage isn't expandable so it's a strange thing to want to do. The text of Wikipedia is not that big. A complete (uncompressed) copy is 200GB, but that includes all revision history and user pages. The current version of the English Wikipedia is around 4GB of text. This leaves another 4GB for filling up with images.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Another step closer by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      Not sure when iLiad came around, but this has been done on iPod Linux since at least 2003. Nothing beats a massive hard drive.

  10. What about editing by yerpo · · Score: 1, Funny

    Are you crazy? Imagine the frustration when you find this horrible typo and you can't fix it!

    1. Re:What about editing by mmkkbb · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Gah, or the nearly ubiquitous misuse of the word "irony."

      --
      -mkb
    2. Re:What about editing by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      I know, isn't it ironic?

    3. Re:What about editing by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Or people saying "random" when they mean "arbitrary."

      It's annoying (although expected) that the words people mix up are the ones that require subtlety in their use. It's as if the more expressive a word or phrase is, the more likely it is to be horribly misused. That's the real story of Babel...some of us want to keep building language into something more expressive, but the higher that tower gets, the easier it is for the DGAS crowd to knock it over.

      Especially journalists. They think that they'll sound smarter if they say things like "begs the question." And they do, but only among people who don't know what it means.

      How's that for irony?

  11. Not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can fit as much as you damn please if you leave out all the media.

  12. Nothing new by Hrshgn · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is nothing new. Wikipedia has been available for several years now in MDict format: http://www.octopus-studio.com/product.en.htm

    1. Re:Nothing new by Sentry21 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given the trouble Patrick had squeezing down a full DB dump of Wikipedia to fit into 2GB (for the app store), I find it impossible to believe that the 162 MB files I've found so far for Wikipedia in MDict format are anywhere near the full text (which Patrick's app is).

    2. Re:Nothing new by tomthepom · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're not looking hard enough. Wikipedia has also been available in Tomeraider format for a while now.

    3. Re:Nothing new by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      I put Wikipedia on my Laptop a few years ago, for when I'm travelling around with no net access. Since then I periodically update it.

      Last I checked, it was only a 2.2GB download gzip'd.

    4. Re:Nothing new by leenks · · Score: 1

      The MDict version was created in June 2006, and I believe uses a dump from 2003 so that the files don't get too big for the MDict database format.

    5. Re:Nothing new by MPAB · · Score: 1

      I've been using the Wikipedia on my Palm TX for two or three years now. There's a guy that makes snapshots of the spanish Wikipedia each 6mo or so and uploads them in TomeRaider format. The last version takes about 2/3 of my 2gb card with reduced images.

      Countless times I've looked into it for info about places, people, etc. Almost any town of Spain appears there, with touristic references. Also It's solved many a doubt on history, math, physics, biology, etc.

      The only drawback is the index, which has problems with hyphens. I wanted to download the english Wikipedia, but it takes more than the 4gb the TX will let me use in an SD card.

    6. Re:Nothing new by samkass · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong, but I think that until recently Wikipedia's license would have forbid copying it into an iPhone app for sale at the App Store. I think the recent license change is what allowed this more than any technological advance.

      --
      E pluribus unum
  13. Iphone, yes but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about my palm/mobil phone/netbook/olpc/etc/etc?

  14. Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    And for those preferring accuracy and editorial responsibility :

    http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/08/02/27/britannica.on.iphone/

    1. Re:Better by Joska · · Score: 1

      Thank you, anonymous cowardly brother (or sister). People's complacency about truth defined by popular consensus and mediated by members of a clique distresses me more with each passing day.

  15. State of the articles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How are the snapshots taken? What if at the time of taking a snapshot there is a vandalized version of an article?

  16. Wikipedia has an entry on the Kama Sutra ... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... so clearly this app will never make it through Apple's review process.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:Wikipedia has an entry on the Kama Sutra ... by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I would be of the opinion that they could never make a complete review of this package, as Wikipedia is constantly changing, and already huge.

    2. Re:Wikipedia has an entry on the Kama Sutra ... by maxume · · Score: 1

      "Snapshot" means that it isn't constantly changing.

      Still, the only way they do a complete review is if they are slavishly, inanely devoted to process rather than results (because the group of people offended by Wikipedia is so small as to not be worth worrying about as customers; perhaps this isn't obvious, but I would take it as obvious).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Wikipedia has an entry on the Kama Sutra ... by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I have the idea that the approval process consists of an Apple employee typing swearing words into any text field of an app.

      We're in the middle of creating an iPhone app for a client and they provide an API for the app. I've actually advised them to filter out a bunch of bad words, so the approval process won't be impeded for some dumb reason.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    4. Re:Wikipedia has an entry on the Kama Sutra ... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Don't they just hire middle schoolers to type in dirty words and see what happens? Or if they're being really cost conscious, they just block anything too large to completely review.

  17. Cool by PolarBearFire · · Score: 1

    It's cool but not $10 cool. I use 2 free apps that let me access wikipedia. Nothing really new or radical about this app unless wikipedia is really much larger and the author managed to cull 2gb from it.

    1. Re:Cool by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      As of October 2006, the English Wikipedia database was 4.4Gig, and had been doubling annually.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  18. Profits by notseamus · · Score: 1

    It would be nice if he shared/donated some of the profits from this to Wikipedia, seeing as he's getting the database for free. There didn't seem to be a mention of it in the article or his personal site.

    --
    I dreamed of Freud: What does this mean?
    1. Re:Profits by twoshortplanks · · Score: 3, Informative

      He is; It's detailed on the info for the app in iTunes. Since you need iTunes to read that, I'll simply post a screenshot: http://img.skitch.com/20090703-e7kkm8i7f4wdq9ir92td898wr3.jpg (skitch may eventually delete that image after a while...)

      --
      -- Sorry, I can't think of anything funny to say here.
    2. Re:Profits by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder exactly what "portion of the proceeds" go through to the Wikimedia Foundation?
      I hate when companies don't just come out and say it explicitly. It makes me think they might just be paying a penny on the dollar so they can play the "philanthropy" card. I like that Target Corp clearly states that "5% of our profits" go to charity (admittedly, much of this may be in the form of product donations, but still.)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_Corporation#Philanthropy

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    3. Re:Profits by ensignyu · · Score: 1

      I can imagine that for some companies, they don't want to mention the percent to avoid revealing their actual sales figures -- since the total amount of money donated will probably show up in the charity's public disclosures. Also, it lets them change it according to how generous they're feeling at the moment and their financial situation.

      It would be nice if they at least announced the total amount raised, which gives you a reasonable sense of whether it's a significant amount of money for a company of their size, or if the entirety of the donation turned out to be a check for $1000 for a nation-wide promotion.

  19. FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about Wikipedia, what some [who?] consider the most complete general survey of human knowledge

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AWW

  20. Why do this? by grumpyman · · Score: 1

    Isn't the wireless access is for that purpose???

  21. XML Compression by firefarter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, I'm reading here that they convert the XML into proprietary metadata and compress that.

    Why not use EXI (Efficent XML Interchange) http://www.w3.org/XML/EXI/ which has been tested as more efficient that gzip and requires less memory to parse? Especially since the XML processing can remain the same, since the nodeset is the same.

    1. Re:XML Compression by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      Off topic, but this always fascinates/annoys me:
      firefarter says, "Why not use EXI (Efficent XML Interchange) which has been tested as more efficient that gzip and requires less memory to parse?"
      Why do so many people (mostly in the British English tradition) so often use "that" as a comparative in place of "than" ?
      Not wanting to nit-pick, just curious why I see it so much.
      Is it seen as odd but acceptable? Is it laziness? Is phonic similarity erasing the difference between the two words? Is it just tradition? Also is it, as I think, mostly a British habit?
      I see it all the time, but never in shorter comparisons, (ie "He is smarter that I am.") where presumably it is more obviously odd sounding.
      Any comments?

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    2. Re:XML Compression by firefarter · · Score: 1

      Happy to fuel your fascination, but it was just a typo. Chill.

    3. Re:XML Compression by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      I was "chilled" before I posted, firefarter. I'm just curious. In your case you say its a typo but I see it frequently and doubt that it can be dismissed as a typo. I assume something more is in play.
      In your case not, apparently, but many very articulate people do this as the norm.
      Anyone else with an insight?

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    4. Re:XML Compression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do so many people (mostly in the British English tradition) so often use "that" as a comparative in place of "than" ?

      Because the word "than" has been stolen for things that aren't actual comparatives- I cringe a little bit every time I see "different than". It's more than, less than, bigger than, colder than, more efficient than, but "identical to" and "different from". Oddly, as a Brit I notice these things much more often in what is obviously American English.

      I used to think it was a typo, but it's a pretty massive typo. Maybe it's a thinko: people start typing "tha" and their fingers fill in the "t". The same thing happens to me every time I try to type "internal" and find my fingers typing "internet"- by the time you are six letters into a word you are pretty much running on muscle memory. If I ever heard someone *say* "that" as a comparative, I'd have to introduce them to the stick of learning.

    5. Re:XML Compression by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      AC, glad someone is at least a bit in sync with my thought on this. But you too assume it is just a written mistake. I hear people speak this pattern all the time (and I do want to take the stick of learning to them.)
      Your post reminds me of another British pattern I read and hear all the time--
      using "different to" rather than "different from"
      Does this grate on British ears like it does on mine?

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    6. Re:XML Compression by hedwards · · Score: 1

      People do it all the time, it's probably more appropriately termed a "thinko" most of the time it's a result of somebody changing their mind midstream as to how the rest of the sentence should go. Other it's as simple as getting a little bit distracted and thinking of that instead of than.

      Then there's the people who don't actually know any better. Good luck figuring out which one it is.

    7. Re:XML Compression by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      it was just a typo

      My best guess would then be that you use the Dvorak keyboard layout. Good on you.

      Everyone else: switch to Dvorak, even if only for the satisfaction of spotting those only-sensible-with-Dvorak typos. It's great fun ;-)

  22. Complete human knowledge? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I go to Wikipedia for two things; when I want summarized descriptions of fictional stories, and information about weights and measures and official standards. And boring details nobody has any opinion about which are so chipped in stone, I don't have to worry about how fractured and tangled up the editors' various emotional/intellectual states were at the time of the entry inclusion. Stories are safe because they're not real, and it's hard for Official Culture to get along when it distorts the way you convert miles to kilometers. (Though it would bloody do so if it thought it could get away with it!)

    Other than that, Wikipedia is Humanity's dream-state navel-gazing summary of what it WISHES were real and not what IS. There is so much content on Wikipedia I disagree with that I barely even notice the red-light flashing in my brain when I scan any given article, or as more often happens, the lack of an article.

    No wonder you can cram that thing into 8 gigs. Hell, I was flipping through an encyclopedia from the 40's, and under "Dynamite", it had detailed instructions on how to MAKE it yourself and how to blast rocks from your property. --Wikipedia isn't even as informative as a general knowledge set of dead-tree books from last century. But it IS smaller and more portable. I guess that's good.

    And sorry, XKCD fans, but the Hitchhiker's Guide, (fictional though it is), isn't hamstrung with political correctness and facts washed out of existence by human insecurities. Maybe when humanity grows up and can handle looking at reality straight on will Wikipedia become something to be proud of. At the moment it's merely the litmus test for social maturity with embarrassing results.

    Sorry for ranting, but honestly!

    -FL

    1. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      [citation needed]

      I'm not really kidding. Your anti-Wikipedia rant is entertaining, but it doesn't provide any substance. Speaking for myself, when I go to Wikipedia for a refresher on something I already know about, I'm generally pleased with the quality of the results, which makes me think that the articles on subjects I don't know much about are likely to be pretty good too.

      Your line about "political correctness and facts washed out of existence by human insecurities" provides a clue as to what really bothers you about Wikipedia: reality's well-known liberal bias. Unless you can provide specific examples, with citations, it's reasonable to assume that the Wikipedia groupmind knows more about the way things really work than some random dude on /.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than that, Wikipedia is Humanity's dream-state navel-gazing summary of what it WISHES were real and not what IS. There is so much content on Wikipedia I disagree with that I barely even notice the red-light flashing in my brain...

      This really seems to get you worked up... Why don't you Just use your encyclopedia from the 40s and don't think about wikipedia, if that really seems more useful to you.

      And sorry, XKCD fans, but the Hitchhiker's Guide, (fictional though it is), isn't hamstrung with political correctness and facts washed out of existence by human insecurities.

      So... no you compare WP to a imaginary guide? Didn't you just accuse the rest of humanity of trying to live in a dream state? It would be more effective if you showed us how bad wikipedia is by comparing it to something, you know, existing.

    3. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      "reality's well-known liberal bias"

      [citation needed]

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    4. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      "reality's well-known liberal bias"

      [citation needed]

      Hmmm, good point. Here's an edit:

      "reality's well-known liberal bias [January 20, 2001 - January 20, 2009]"

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      Why don't you Just use your encyclopedia from the 40s and don't think about wikipedia, if that really seems more useful to you.

      Thank-you. I already do that. I also tap a multitude of other information sources. It's call "research". It's what you have to do when, "the most complete general survey of human knowledge we have at the moment," fails to deliver.

      So... no you compare WP to a imaginary guide? Didn't you just accuse the rest of humanity of trying to live in a dream state? It would be more effective if you showed us how bad wikipedia is by comparing it to something, you know, existing.

      When so many others have equated the two and found themselves happily pleased with the results, it is entirely fair for me to subject that same comparison to more objective lighting. If you have trouble with that, then you're not looking at the whole picture, but are simply picking out disposable items to put in your fish barrel for easy target practice. But otherwise, congratulations on a devastating argument.

      -FL

    6. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      I'm not really kidding. Your anti-Wikipedia rant is entertaining, but it doesn't provide any substance. Speaking for myself, when I go to Wikipedia for a refresher on something I already know about, I'm generally pleased with the quality of the results, which makes me think that the articles on subjects I don't know much about are likely to be pretty good too.

      So. . , it is good at re-enforcing your current belief structure, and when exploring new areas of knowledge, you trust it to maintain the calming, authoritative feeling of security. How nice that must be for you. You must feel right with the world when you close your browser.

      You want examples? You mean you want me to work for your benefit when you are a smarmy ass whose belief system I really don't give two figs about and who would work hard to reject anything offered which doesn't fit with his comfortable dream-version of reality? Can you even take a small personal criticism without becoming angry and defensive? Most people cannot, so how the heck would you manage with having firmly held beliefs examined? Why on earth would I want to waste such enormous amounts of energy on such an individual? Answer: "I don't."

      Your line about "political correctness and facts washed out of existence by human insecurities" provides a clue as to what really bothers you about Wikipedia: reality's well-known liberal bias. Unless you can provide specific examples, with citations, it's reasonable to assume that the Wikipedia groupmind knows more about the way things really work than some random dude on /.

      When you say the "Wikipedia groupmind" I assume you mean "Human groupmind", and pardon me for coughing somewhat at that. Our world is a giant ridiculous mess and it was put there thanks to the Human groupmind. Reality's well-known liberal bias? -???- Aside from the fact that I'm probably more genuinely left than your average hippie, bent politics are a given in Wikipedia, and the war for Left and Right rages on while I don't actually care much since that combat zone is very small and very deliberately provoked and contained, and thus, simply Does Not Matter.

      Rather, it's the "Learning Channel" style of pompous assumption and tone affected by every entry where it might matter. Look up the entry for James Randi, for instance. The dream version of that reality is very well cited and documented on WP, and so the illusion remains comforting and intact while the other side of the story remains ignored. And that other side? Sorry. You're an ass, so I'm not going to give you anything which you could find out for yourself.

      -Some Random Guy on Slashdot.

    7. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      If you want stirling examples of angry defensiveness and pomposity, take a look at your own post. Clearly you'd rather just fling poo than engage in anything like a constructive debate. Just be aware that you're not likely to influence anyone's opinion with the attitude -- if you're happy with just ranting for no real reason, then hey, have fun with that.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    8. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      If you want stirling examples of angry defensiveness and pomposity, take a look at your own post. Clearly you'd rather just fling poo than engage in anything like a constructive debate. Just be aware that you're not likely to influence anyone's opinion with the attitude -- if you're happy with just ranting for no real reason, then hey, have fun with that.

      Fair enough. But I also happen to be right.

      The interesting part is that my tone with these last couple of posts is about par for the course for me, but on this particular subject, people seem to get very upset. I was actually surprised to see my 'score' plummet as it did. I honestly half expected it to shoot in the other direction. I clearly don't have my finger entirely tuned to the pulse of popular human awareness, which is probably why I'm still here. Learning how the rest of the monkeys think.

      The intensity of the knee-jerk always says a lot about how deeply and tightly tied the emotional knots are. The subject of human knowledge, what we do and do not know, is a very prickly one. The ego is intimately linked to it, particularly with geeks.

      -FL

    9. Re:Complete human knowledge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality has no bias. Only people do and those filters are applied to what they read or write. Wikipedia's groupmind/clique has a bias because they are human. Goebbels would be proud of them and their claims that they are not.

  23. Re:iPhone wannabe by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Troll

    you can install it over wifi or from iTunes over USB, retard.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  24. *shrug* Did this a year ago on a psion 5MX by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 1

    http://www.instructables.com/id/SBK1NAUFF78M26B/

    I found these instructions in May 2008 and created a reasonably current snapshot of wikipedia that is still rather compact on a Psion 5MX. Not quite the same "curb appeal" as an iPhone, but a lot more functional.

    Best,

  25. Wikipedia Midlet by Timmmm · · Score: 1

    Bah, that's nothing. I made an offline Wikipedia midlet! Unfortunately J2ME is unpleasant to say the least, and my phone only supports 2 GB SD cards so it only has some of the articles and without text.

  26. EXCELLENT app, but limited by jbarr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been using this app for quite a while on my 1st gen iPod Touch, and it works and works well. It's amazing just how many articles it has. Other than some cosmetic and minor feature issues, the only real limitation is that Apple limits data file size to 2GB, so there is an obvious limit as to how much can go into the file. But it is amazingly complete. No images, no fancy tables--just text articles at your fingertips.

    If you Jailbreak your iPhone/iPod Touch, then an excellent alternative is the Wiki2Touch app. Unfortunately, it seems that it's been pretty much abandoned in development, so it may be hit-or-miss if it works on OS v3.x. This implementation was REALLY slick. It provided a 4GB data file (that was much more complete) and a small Web server. You enabled the Web server, fired up Safari, and pointed it to a local URL. The app presented quick and very readable articles. And if you went to the trouble to download and process, you could also add about 4GB of image files to make things more complete (on a larger-capacity device, of course.)

    Here's a review that I posted for both apps just over a year ago on my iPod Touch Tips site:
    http://jimstips.com/ipod-touch-tips/ipod-touch-review-wikpedia-on-your-ipod-touch.html

    In both cases, the main complaint is updating. In order to update the data file, you have to re-download the data, and depending on the app, you are typically at the mercy of the developer to provide an update. Otherwise, you had to download, index, and install the HUGE files yourself.

    If you absolutely HAVE to have updated, offline data, check out the Wikipanion app. It's a nice compromise.

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    1. Re:EXCELLENT app, but limited by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      >> Other than some cosmetic and minor feature issues, the only real limitation is that Apple limits data file size to 2GB, so there is an obvious limit as to how much can go into the file.

      From the interview, Apple can't actually handle anything even close to the 2GB stated limit. The app itself is a stub, and downloads the data from elsewhere.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  27. WikiPock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have a PDA running Windows Mobile, Android or Blackberry, you can use WikiPock: http://www.wikipock.com/

  28. 8 Gig? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Sounds a bit small.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  29. Because it works with 0 bars by tepples · · Score: 1

    I use 2 free apps that let me access wikipedia. Nothing really new or radical about this app

    Except it works when you're away from a hotspot, even if you paid only $220 (not $100 + $80/mo * 24 months) for your device.

  30. Wikibooks is for how-to guides by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hell, I was flipping through an encyclopedia from the 40's, and under "Dynamite", it had detailed instructions on how to MAKE it yourself

    Wikipedia doesn't have how-to guides. If you want that, use Wikibooks.

    1. Re:Wikibooks is for how-to guides by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or wikihow, except it's full of gay articles...

  31. Talk to people, and public libraries by fantomas · · Score: 1

    I think you could probably get answers to your questions by visiting public libraries, and talking to people. Maybe the "talking to people" bit might not get you definitive answers (though probably as good as a lot of Wikipedia content) but you might have found out a whole lot more. Also the public libraries probably had a lot of this info if you were looking for solid facts.

    I appreciate a portable + off the net wikipedia would be a cool tool as well but nothing beats chatting to the locals.

    1. Re:Talk to people, and public libraries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Libraries - take time to get to, assuming it's even open, and can take a ton of time to locate the book you need, and THEN locate where in the book the information is. If I'm in a foreign country, I do NOT want to spend large quantities of time cooped up in a library when I could have just as easily gotten the information on wikipedia in 5 minutes, no matter where I am.

      Talking to people - Personally, I'd rather not bug locals about history that's either a) sensitive (ie: a drought killing thousands), or b) common sense to everyone local. But with that option, that's just me.

    2. Re:Talk to people, and public libraries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The locals would wonder why he gives a shit about a bunch of oxygen thieves.

  32. Re:iPhone wannabe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You, sir, are a troll, so I shall not correct your ignorance.

  33. Re:iPhone wannabe by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    Actually the app is 0.1MB from the app store, then it downloads the database from a non-apple server. And like the other poster said, you can install it over WiFi.

  34. Of Typos and Thinkos by whiledo · · Score: 1

    You should study how mistakes are made a bit more. When typing fast, I often mistype one work for another. Even though I know very well the rules for "its" and "it's" (a mistake you made in your post), "their" and "there", "than and then", sometimes my fingers just decide to type one thing even though my brain is thinking another. Sometimes I type "you" instead of "your", too. Or "to" instead of "too". None of this has anything to do with not knowing the rules. It's partially about not proofreading (c'mon, it's just a slashdot comment), but even proofreading can miss them because the brain sometimes reads what it means and not what it sees.

    --
    Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
    1. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      A plausible explanation for written communication.
      But if you were to "study what my post said a bit more," you wouldn't assume I was only refering to written communication. =-)
      Although people also make mistakes in oral communication, they tend not to be typographic. Your thoughts do not explain why this is also a common spoken habit/pattern for many people (mostly British, in my experience)
      Thanks for the post

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    2. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by whiledo · · Score: 1

      Well, the thing is, I have never heard anyone use "that" rather than "than" in verbal communication. So, no, I can't really follow that line. Only thing I ever here is "then" being mixed up with "than", in both directions.

      --
      Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
    3. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      Sorry to bring it to your attention. Now that I've pointed it out, you probably will start to hear it (because it is definitely out there.)
      Now it will bug you as much as it does me. =-)

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    4. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by whiledo · · Score: 1

      Nah, don't expect so. I have heard plenty of instances of phrases along the lines of "I am twice the man that he is." But that's completely grammatically correct. Googling "smarter that I am" returned only 371 hits and scanning them looks doesn't make me thing that it's anything other than a typo. Even if it wasn't, this compares to 424,000 hits for "smarter than I am." That's about 0.09% of the hits. I'm going to go ahead and round that to zero.

      --
      Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
    5. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      That's astonishing! when did Google start indexing people's spoken speech? ;-)
      Actually though, I don't hear it in short and simple personal statements like "smarter that I am." It tends to be in longer, more complex non-personal phrases, where presumably the oddness of the usage is masked. Which is "different to" what you are saying!
      I've hear this usage on the BBC news (don't remember if it was a reporter though.).

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    6. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by whiledo · · Score: 1

      Please, no need to be snarky. Google results ARE a good indication of the way people are using language, both written and spoken. If it is as widespread as you say, then there would be far more hits in proportion to the correct way.

      I took your example. You are the one making the claim. I'm sorry your example turned out not to be an example. If you have an actual example that you want to use as an example, please post it. Until then, I'm afraid I'm going to have to file you in the crazy file. ;-)

      --
      Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
    7. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      Wildo, the snark is all yours (are you emoticon aware?)
      You seem to take as little care in reading other's posts as you do in writing your responses to them. Go back and look at my "example" --
      "I see it all the time, but never in shorter comparisons, (ie "He is smarter that I am.") where presumably it is more obviously odd sounding."
      It is an example of what I never see, not of what I always see.
      Google may well be useful in shedding light on this question, but like any other tool, its only as capable as the wielder.

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    8. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by Me!+Me!+42 · · Score: 1

      One way to use Google intelligently:
      Search for the phrase, "that instead of than"
      The second hit is a page devoted to literacy that contains (in the sidebar) a list of favorite common "misspellings"
      There is page that shows Wallace Stevens made the mistake in his (handwritten) correspondence.
      There are a whole slew of editorial corrections of this mistake.
      This may indicate that it is a common error that is not attributable to a (standard) keyboard ("a" and "e" are 2 fingers and a row away from each other) and therefore its not simply a typo.
      conclusion
      I'd say Hedwards and the AC win the prize with their "Thinko" hypotheses. It covers written, typed, and spoken instances.

      --
      -- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
    9. Re:Of Typos and Thinkos by sh00z · · Score: 1

      I call BS. Typing fast leads to "teh" instead of "the," or "form" instead of "from." Only ignorance can cause you to mistype "there" for "their."

  35. Advice by DissociativeBehavior · · Score: 2, Funny

    App Store purchasers of Collison's open source application can browse and search the full text of Wikipedia when stuck in a plane

    This page is not recommended when you're stuck in a plane...

    1. Re:Advice by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I would also argue that a list of accidents involving a wood plane should be avoided. Avoiding them might be a very close shave though.

  36. Re:*shrug* Did this a year ago on a psion 5MX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did you get the current snapshot of Wikipedia? I'm working on the Mark 2 (Nokia N770, shinier hardware but sadly hamstrung by the 2GB memory card limit) and I want a current version of WP, not some years-out-of-date CD edition. If you can provide some details I'll put them in the Instructable and give you credit.

    - PKM

  37. Where Are the Windows And Linux Versions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always thought somethings like this would interesting for a standard operating system, for when your Internet connection goes down, for when you're traveling with a laptop and don't have access to a wifi network, or, in tough economic times, for when perhaps your financial situation declines and you can't afford Internet access (hopefully temporarily) but still have the computer you bought when times where better (or were given an old legacy computer by someone no longer using it).

    It's kind of a pet peeve of mine to see so many things created for the closed relatively small i-phone ap store and not ported to the operating systems we all have for normal computers. It's not an issue with Apple, I love itunes and ipods, it's just that I'd like to see these things available to a larger market, maybe as open-source aps. I've actually been waiting on something like this for a long time, specifically for Wikipedia, but I don't have an iphone or an ipod touch, and a monthly fee is a bit much for something that is a essentially a "backup" Wikipedia.

  38. Warning: 3 majors problem with this app. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I bought this application 6 months ago and there are 3 majors problems with it:
    1) The search function is broken because you need to type the exact word (prefix)
    2) This is plain text: no pictures and no tables so most articles with "list" are useless
    3) No update mechanism so the dump used will be outdated soon.

    1. Re:Warning: 3 majors problem with this app. by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Update mechanism for everything on the App Store: 1) Open iTunes. 2) Hit Update on Applications "Page". 3) Sync iPhone. So, there's no update mechanism present?

  39. Web Version by SnarfQuest · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is there a version of this that will run in a web browser? Anyone have a link?

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  40. other solutions by fsiefken · · Score: 1

    I had this for ages with Windows Mobile had this for ages with Tomeraider3 wikipedia database. Instead of using bzip2, it's more efficient and elegant to store the table in sqlite and use it's excellent sqlite3 compression.

  41. Re:*shrug* Did this a year ago on a psion 5MX by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    You can download the database in a variety of formats. You'll need to trim it down quite a bit; the download of just the article text (no images, no history, no user pages, no discussion) is over 4GB compressed. You can probably compress this better with something a bit more domain-specific than gzip, and you can probably eliminate a lot of articles that are just stubs.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  42. YAwn, this app has been around for a year by Latinhypercube · · Score: 1

    Is this an ad ?

  43. Just use the mobile-formatted version by daemonenwind · · Score: 4, Informative

    try this link from your mobile phone:
    http://wapedia.mobi/en/

    That way you get the whole thing, up-to-date, and with no trouble or major memory usage.

    1. Re:Just use the mobile-formatted version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this works without a connection?

      For some reason I thought the point of this app was that it worked offline.

  44. !(Browser `implies` internet-connected) by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    I know you're being funny, but my first idea for how to implement this would be to

    • Store the data massively compressed
    • Run a custom http and/or cgi script which on-demand decompresses and serves straight-up html
    • Look at that in a browser

    I use a browser for viewing /usr/share/doc/**/*html. Not all uses of a browser have to leave 127.0.0.1.

  45. Far worse pages than that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  46. This is great in the event of a nuclear holocaust! by Doug52392 · · Score: 1

    With North Korea's nuclear weapons threats looming over the whole world every day, one must wonder what would happen if, one day, nuclear missiles are fired, plunging the world into a post-apocalyptic darkness.

    The progress of humanity could be lost with the destruction of the Internet, libraries, etc. Luckily, you can now carry the history of the world and beyond - on your iPhone! Combine that with a power generator, and you'll still hold the history of the world!

  47. Can they do incremental updating? by Willbur · · Score: 1

    TiniWiki also does this. I haven't done a detailed comparison with the one in the article, but I last time I looked TinyWiki was pretty good. They had two advantages over some other similar products: a) they had more of Wikipedia, not just a cut-down or old selection, and b) they could do incremental updates.

  48. TiniWiki is way better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have used both Patrick's app and this other one called TiniWiki.

    TiniWiki is WAY BETTER! Patrick's app doesn't even know who Obama is!!!!

    I couldn't even do proper search on Patrick's app and it does not have ANY references and info boxes, etc. All the important information in a wiki article.

    Disclaimer, I am a friend of the developer of TiniWiki, but I have used both so I can say I am very impressed with TiniWiki.

    And they support updates!!!!

  49. http://www.mobilewikiserver.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard these guys http://www.mobilewikiserver.com are looking at doing that at some point

  50. Why is this tagged under macbook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article is clearly about an iPhone.

  51. aarddict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    aarddict can already do this on the nokia internet tablets (and it works on linux and windows). there are dictionary files available all the major languages. http://aarddict.org/

  52. Bury it somewhere safe and obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine the archeologist who finds it 1000 years from now. Awesome snapshot of this moment in history and whoever buries it, will be remembered for centuries after it's found.