On 1/19/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Citizendium can only be considered "Free
knowledge" when it is indeed
Free knowledge.
And right now, Citizendium *is* "Free knowledge".
You mention that they may use the CC-by-ND license.
Not
only is that license incompatible with the GFDL, being more restrictive,
it will prevent them from using the Wikipedia content as its source.
This is likely to brake the back of their project as I am sure that a
sufficient large group of people will create a class action that
Citizendium cannot win.
I'm not sure what you mean by a class action, but yes, I agree that CZ
will almost surely not survive if they go with CC-by-NC (which was
what is being considered, not CC-by-ND).
If CZ becomes
successful without being a fork of Wikipedia (and
they're apparently going to try), then it *won't* have the same data
as Wikipedia. It's unlikely it'll even have "more or less the same
data".
But thinking about this, I guess it's unclear to me what this has to
do with Google being important to the dissemination of Free Content.
Is the "our" part of that important? Is this about whether or not CZ
will be Free Content? I just learned today that they're considering
CC-by-NC. I guess if they choose that license it'll matter. But
Google doesn't seem to rank Free Content sites any higher than others.
Here the law makes all the difference and prevent CZ from using the
Wikipedia content.
As of this Saturday, CZ is going to stop using Wikipedia content by
default, at least on a trial basis.
There is every reason to acknowledge when you benefit
from the business
practices of a friendly organisation. The absolute minimum that this
realisation does is to allow you to acknowledge what it is that makes us
a success. When we are smart it means we maintain friendly relations
with those organisations that enable our success. Google fits that bill.
Microsoft does not appreciate Wikipedia for what it does and as a
consequence suffers in its appreciation. I do not touch Microsoft's
search engine with a barge pole because of their bias. It is also
something that enables the argument why Microsoft is "evil".
I'll have to think more about that. Personally I think Microsoft's
search engine is crap, but I'm using their OS to write this message,
so if one is going to have to acknowledge every company which has
contributed to making Wikipedia possible, I don't think you can ignore
Microsoft.
The fact that anyone uses a Microsoft OS makes no difference to the
quality of their search engine.
I didn't mean to imply it did.
If you want to improve on what Google does,
please do.
If I get the time and/or the money, I will. But in the meantime, I'm
not going to make them out to be this great company that does no
wrong.
I mean, if you want to improve on what Microsoft does, please do. Do
you see how that statement isn't really helpful?
You can improve on Microsoft by not choosing their product as the basis
of your entry to the computerised world. You can have a BSD, Apple,
Linux desktop instead.
So am I improving on Google by using a different search engine? What
if I use Scroogle (which, actually, I do)?
If Google
didn't exist at all, I don't think Wikipedia would be any worse off.
There is anecdotal evidence that you are SO wrong.
Interesting. I'm not aware of any such evidence. Yes, a lot of
contributors to Wikipedia happened to first hear about it due to a
Google search. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have heard about
it if they used some other search engine.
Personally I think it was Slashdot that brought me to Google. So I
guess they're to blame for my arrival. But then again, it might have
been Google. I'm pretty sure it was one or the other.
But I don't even remember what search engine I used before Google. I
think it was Yahoo. Do Wikipedia pages rank high in Yahoo? Ah,
Yahoo, I remember when *that* used to be the corporation that everyone
loved and praised. Now they're helping the Chinese put people in
jail. I wonder how long before Google does that little bit of evil.
AFAIK they haven't actively helped the government put people in
jail...yet.
Anthony