"On Intelligence" is a fairly interesting book on the subject. The author, Jeff Hawkins, is a computer engineer turned neuro-biologist, who's interest in the subject inspired him to pursue a comprehensive theory on how intelligence works.
> A community page that cant criticize itself and its creator(s), really dont have anything to do with being a community.
Well, it's still a community, just not an open one. The existence of editors obviously introduces censorship into the mix. However, considering that an encyclopedia is usually more concerned with generally undisputed facts, room for opinion is not as important.
Most people (geeks aren't people) would probably not be interested in a definition like this one...
Microsoft: A monopolistic evil empire that produces security holes for others to exloit
That having been said, I believe the real downfall of a community driven content system that requires review is the scale. I seriously doubt that Encarta's going to be able to afford enough editors to review all of the content that a truly interactive community could offer. One of the beauties of Wikipedia is the obscurity of knowledge that having a world of contributors allows.
There seems to be a lot of speculation out there as to what profitable motivations IBM might have regarding Linux. Here's a conspiracy theory for the masses:
Considering their involvement with the new "Cell" chip, it seems like IBM's in the market for an operating system that's not tied to the x86 architecture. Even if Cell proved to be "better" than the x86 line, they'd have to lure consumers/developers away from their dependence and long standing reliance on Intel's architecture. Of course, all pre-existing compiled software would be useless on Cell. However, it just so happens that open-source software and specifically Linux are much better at jumping platforms than say...Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
"On Intelligence" is a fairly interesting book on the subject. The author, Jeff Hawkins, is a computer engineer turned neuro-biologist, who's interest in the subject inspired him to pursue a comprehensive theory on how intelligence works.
5 074562/qid=1118068948/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/102-4172 841-8686568?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Good read. Not overly technical.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080
> A community page that cant criticize itself and its creator(s), really dont have anything to do with being a community.
Well, it's still a community, just not an open one. The existence of editors obviously introduces censorship into the mix. However, considering that an encyclopedia is usually more concerned with generally undisputed facts, room for opinion is not as important.
Most people (geeks aren't people) would probably not be interested in a definition like this one...
Microsoft: A monopolistic evil empire that produces security holes for others to exloit
That having been said, I believe the real downfall of a community driven content system that requires review is the scale. I seriously doubt that Encarta's going to be able to afford enough editors to review all of the content that a truly interactive community could offer. One of the beauties of Wikipedia is the obscurity of knowledge that having a world of contributors allows.
There seems to be a lot of speculation out there as to what profitable motivations IBM might have regarding Linux. Here's a conspiracy theory for the masses:
Considering their involvement with the new "Cell" chip, it seems like IBM's in the market for an operating system that's not tied to the x86 architecture. Even if Cell proved to be "better" than the x86 line, they'd have to lure consumers/developers away from their dependence and long standing reliance on Intel's architecture. Of course, all pre-existing compiled software would be useless on Cell. However, it just so happens that open-source software and specifically Linux are much better at jumping platforms than say...Windows.