Web 2.0 seems to be convergence of text and semantic data and as Boyd said in Knowledge Access as a Public Good, “The Internet and Wikipedia change the rules for distribution and production.” Enhancing the web will give many more opportunities to share information between users, and as long as people are using the internet there will only be improvement after improvement. Here's my argument: Are improvements always a good thing? I say yes and no, but who is to say what an improvement really is. The Wikipedia articles focused on what was good and what was bad about making improvements. I think when sharing false information on the web influences how people think, there's a problem.If you ask the students on campus what website they use to look up information on a particular topic, the majority of students will reply with Wikipedia. Since I can remember, teachers have told us not to use Wikipedia as a resource and not to trust the information. I agree with many, Wikipedia is a site unlike many others and I think it gives a person a chance to dig a little deeper with the links and maybe introduce new information that otherwise would not have been presented. Sure, a site that anyone is able to edit may get a person into a little trouble, but as with many things, there will be pros and cons. After reading this article, which focuses on the cons of Wikipedia, made me think a little more about using a more reliable site such as MSN Encarta. What is the point of using shared information if there's no way to know if it's accurate?
1 comment:
This issue is packed with fantastic interactive features, and aside being the first readers to get hands-on with Apple's latest and greatest, there's also a fully interactive review of the new Nokia Lumia 620 and a video of Landsat 8, the Google Earth-powering satellite that blasted off this week.
gta 5 apk
Post a Comment