We have content. Who said we didn't? If you want to see an approved article, here's our first. If you want more, ask me or someone else in the project, or just get on the wiki.
First, let me be yet another person to say that I won't use any encyclopedia that forces me to register before I can read. I know that's probably a temporary flaw, but it's a major one.
You are correct that it is a temporary situation. Currently we're only open to contributors. You can get a small sample here. Obviously, that'll change, because we want people to read our stuff.
In terms of vaporware, I'll just point you to one approved article. It's in PDF form because that's easier than screwing with the HTML and making a portable reference. Compare that to the Wikipedia article on Biology and see what you think.
Eventually, once the site is public, that won't be the case. As it stands, the only people who should be on the wiki are the people working on articles. And yes, our Real Name Rule will ultimately require people who want to change articles to provide an email address. But anonymous people will be able to read the site once it leaves "pilot" status.
Wikipedia will always, by nature, be more reactive to world events than Citizendium. Minutes after a major event occurs, the related wikis are updated. Once articles have been tied down and relegated to an editor, it falls to the editor to react to changes in content relevance.
Correct. That is one trade-off. However, having a better article a week or two later is useful for a lot of other purposes. 90% of the articles we intend to have are not going to be rapidly changing. It's rare that we're going to have to completely rewrite [[Biology]] to reflect recent changes, and [[Double data rate]] is likely another thing that's not going to be changing much with the times.
You got that mixed up somehow. I'm talking about certifying CVs at 10 minutes/CV.
As to articles, you'll recall that WP wasn't built in a day. In fact, it was built over 5 years. To expect anyone else to be able to replicate or improve that in anything other than years is silly. But we've got time. If this takes 2 years or 3 or 10, we're here for the long haul.
Well, in this particular case, editors are already pretty familar with "watching" each other. I know that in the academic and scientific worlds, people are pretty accustomed to challenging their peers. Same here. The odds of a massive editor collusion are rather slim based on the number of editors.
The "editor plan" as you call it is as scalable as anything can be. It's not unreasonable to think that a person can review a CV in about 10 minutes. Multiply that by 10 people approving CVs at an hour a day, and we can have 60 new editors a day without breaking a sweat.
I'd be surprised to see recording costs increasing. Wage increases tend to be below the rate of inflation, the technological costs of the recording equipment are going down, and with improvements in technology, it's taking less time to do post-production on a recording.
Yes. This is a fundamental intersection between two economic concepts - Inflation and Moore's Law.
Inflation indices imply that prices have risen over the last few decades. However, those numbers are averages across a wide variety of (generally non-technical) goods. There are numerous causes of inflation, and I won't discuss that here.
Moore's Law is not strictly speaking an economic law, but with the benefits of Moore's Law, we see electronics and machines become more affordable. In all likelihood, production costs have plummeted for the actual music, and I assume CD error rate has gone down. As a result, the cost to make a CD, from start to finish has seen the price of its components fall (as measured in utility/cost). Therefore, the price of CDs don't have to rise.
Correct. The 1983 price of CDs reflected the costs as an immature technology. Production costs for digital music have plummeted, as have the costs associated with pressing CDs. Similarly, in 10 years, the cost of an HD-DVD/Blu-Ray (whichever wins) will be a lot lower than current prices. It won't cost $500 a player, it'll cost more like $100.
In theory, under anti-trust rules, the OneCare Live team has no more access than anyone else. That may not be the case, but that's their line, and they're stickin' to it.
So what? The point here is that Viacom should be doing more than running around demanding the removal of anything that might belong to them, they need to be demanding the removal of things that definitely belong to them. The burden simply can't be on regular people to have to fight Viacom legally for the right to have their own stuff up there.
Doesn't matter--regardless if you discovered Colbert on YouTube, you would have discovered him sooner of later.
Maybe. Maybe not. Hard to say. If I've got no way to find him, then I might not. Information can be free because we share it. I mean, something like Colbert or Stewart is only funny for a little while - I'm not going to get a laugh off of Bush jokes in 2015. In fact, most of the comedy there has a half-life of weeks if not days. Therefore, making my discovery of the material faster is pretty important.
Viacom IS Comedy Central. But you're right that lots of Comedy Central people seem to be savvy to this. When Colbert jested that Youtube owed him $400 million or whatever, he meant the opposite.
Honestly, the reason I watch the Colbert Report is Youtube. If I hadn't seen Colbert at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, I might not watch the show. I mean, they should complain about full episodes, but if there's 3 minutes of Colbert or Stewart on there, it's just advertising to watch those shows.
Well, that's good. The whole point is that 2.16.20 adds features, and manages to do so at basically no cost. It would have been reasonable to expect such additions to inflict a minor speed penalty, but there was no penalty. This is a situation where nothing speaks far louder than something.
The only single difference being the DRM chip they use to lock OSX, and the EFI (versus the classic BIOS)
There is no DRM chip. I have a Mac less than 6 months old. I've spent some time looking for the chip, and I used Amit Singh's software to try to find it. It's only on some models, and is inactive. It's basically only present if it happened to be on the motherboard they use. There's not even an OS X driver for it.
Correct. I was talking "user features". Not underbelly. I'm not disputing the importance of the UNIX core and the security features (those are two big plusses to me), but insofar as the OS features Joe Normal would use, Vista = 10.3
This is so very true. If it wasn't for Vista needing a GB of RAM and 128MB of video RAM to do what my low-end mac laptop has been able to do for 2 years, who knows where the hardware would be today?
Slashdot Mirror
Nupedia was not a fork of Wikipedia, it was designed as a complement site.
We have content. Who said we didn't? If you want to see an approved article, here's our first. If you want more, ask me or someone else in the project, or just get on the wiki.
First, let me be yet another person to say that I won't use any encyclopedia that forces me to register before I can read. I know that's probably a temporary flaw, but it's a major one.
You are correct that it is a temporary situation. Currently we're only open to contributors. You can get a small sample here. Obviously, that'll change, because we want people to read our stuff.
In terms of vaporware, I'll just point you to one approved article. It's in PDF form because that's easier than screwing with the HTML and making a portable reference. Compare that to the Wikipedia article on Biology and see what you think.
Eventually, once the site is public, that won't be the case. As it stands, the only people who should be on the wiki are the people working on articles. And yes, our Real Name Rule will ultimately require people who want to change articles to provide an email address. But anonymous people will be able to read the site once it leaves "pilot" status.
Zach Pruckowski
Citizendium Executive Board
Wikipedia will always, by nature, be more reactive to world events than Citizendium. Minutes after a major event occurs, the related wikis are updated. Once articles have been tied down and relegated to an editor, it falls to the editor to react to changes in content relevance.
Correct. That is one trade-off. However, having a better article a week or two later is useful for a lot of other purposes. 90% of the articles we intend to have are not going to be rapidly changing. It's rare that we're going to have to completely rewrite [[Biology]] to reflect recent changes, and [[Double data rate]] is likely another thing that's not going to be changing much with the times.
Zachary Pruckowski
Citizendium Executive Board
You've got that backwards. Wikipedia was a (sponsored) fork of Nupedia designed to be more "freewheeling".
You got that mixed up somehow. I'm talking about certifying CVs at 10 minutes/CV.
As to articles, you'll recall that WP wasn't built in a day. In fact, it was built over 5 years. To expect anyone else to be able to replicate or improve that in anything other than years is silly. But we've got time. If this takes 2 years or 3 or 10, we're here for the long haul.
Zachary Pruckowski
Citizendium Executive Board
Well, in this particular case, editors are already pretty familar with "watching" each other. I know that in the academic and scientific worlds, people are pretty accustomed to challenging their peers. Same here. The odds of a massive editor collusion are rather slim based on the number of editors.
Zachary Pruckowski
Citizendium Executive Board
The "editor plan" as you call it is as scalable as anything can be. It's not unreasonable to think that a person can review a CV in about 10 minutes. Multiply that by 10 people approving CVs at an hour a day, and we can have 60 new editors a day without breaking a sweat.
Zachary Pruckowski
Citizendium Executive Board
I'd be surprised to see recording costs increasing. Wage increases tend to be below the rate of inflation, the technological costs of the recording equipment are going down, and with improvements in technology, it's taking less time to do post-production on a recording.
Yes. This is a fundamental intersection between two economic concepts - Inflation and Moore's Law.
Inflation indices imply that prices have risen over the last few decades. However, those numbers are averages across a wide variety of (generally non-technical) goods. There are numerous causes of inflation, and I won't discuss that here.
Moore's Law is not strictly speaking an economic law, but with the benefits of Moore's Law, we see electronics and machines become more affordable. In all likelihood, production costs have plummeted for the actual music, and I assume CD error rate has gone down. As a result, the cost to make a CD, from start to finish has seen the price of its components fall (as measured in utility/cost). Therefore, the price of CDs don't have to rise.
Correct. The 1983 price of CDs reflected the costs as an immature technology. Production costs for digital music have plummeted, as have the costs associated with pressing CDs. Similarly, in 10 years, the cost of an HD-DVD/Blu-Ray (whichever wins) will be a lot lower than current prices. It won't cost $500 a player, it'll cost more like $100.
In theory, under anti-trust rules, the OneCare Live team has no more access than anyone else. That may not be the case, but that's their line, and they're stickin' to it.
So what? The point here is that Viacom should be doing more than running around demanding the removal of anything that might belong to them, they need to be demanding the removal of things that definitely belong to them. The burden simply can't be on regular people to have to fight Viacom legally for the right to have their own stuff up there.
Thanks for the password. Your computer has been assimilated.
Cheers, the Borg.
The problem here is not too much cool hardware. That's never a problem. The problem is not enough sharing.
Yeah, but if it malfunctions only 1% of the time, that's tens of thousands of pissed-off users.
Doesn't matter--regardless if you discovered Colbert on YouTube, you would have discovered him sooner of later.
Maybe. Maybe not. Hard to say. If I've got no way to find him, then I might not. Information can be free because we share it. I mean, something like Colbert or Stewart is only funny for a little while - I'm not going to get a laugh off of Bush jokes in 2015. In fact, most of the comedy there has a half-life of weeks if not days. Therefore, making my discovery of the material faster is pretty important.
Viacom IS Comedy Central. But you're right that lots of Comedy Central people seem to be savvy to this. When Colbert jested that Youtube owed him $400 million or whatever, he meant the opposite.
Honestly, the reason I watch the Colbert Report is Youtube. If I hadn't seen Colbert at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, I might not watch the show. I mean, they should complain about full episodes, but if there's 3 minutes of Colbert or Stewart on there, it's just advertising to watch those shows.
Well, that's good. The whole point is that 2.16.20 adds features, and manages to do so at basically no cost. It would have been reasonable to expect such additions to inflict a minor speed penalty, but there was no penalty. This is a situation where nothing speaks far louder than something.
The only single difference being the DRM chip they use to lock OSX, and the EFI (versus the classic BIOS)
There is no DRM chip. I have a Mac less than 6 months old. I've spent some time looking for the chip, and I used Amit Singh's software to try to find it. It's only on some models, and is inactive. It's basically only present if it happened to be on the motherboard they use. There's not even an OS X driver for it.
Correct. I was talking "user features". Not underbelly. I'm not disputing the importance of the UNIX core and the security features (those are two big plusses to me), but insofar as the OS features Joe Normal would use, Vista = 10.3
This is so very true. If it wasn't for Vista needing a GB of RAM and 128MB of video RAM to do what my low-end mac laptop has been able to do for 2 years, who knows where the hardware would be today?