Folks,
C/Net reports that the US intelligence community has launched its version of Wikipedia.
http://news.com.com/Intelligence+czar+unveils+spy+version+of+Wikipedia/2100-...
*The U.S. intelligence community on Tuesday unveiled its own secretive version of Wikipedia, saying the popular online encyclopedia format known for its openness is key to the future of American espionage.*
The office of U.S. intelligence czar John Negroponte announced Intellipedia, which allows intelligence analysts and other officials to collaboratively add and edit content on the government's classified Intelink Web much like its more famous namesake on the Webhttp://news.com.com/Study+Wikipedia+as+accurate+as+Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.html?tag=nl.
A "top secret" Intellipedia system, currently available to the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, has grown to more than 28,000 pages and 3,600 registered users since its introduction on April 17. Less restrictive versions exist for "secret" and "sensitive but unclassified" material.
The system is also available to the Transportation Security Administration and national laboratories.
Intellipedia is currently being used to assemble a major intelligence report, known as a national intelligence estimate, on Nigeria as well as the State Department's annual country reports on terrorism, officials said.
___________________________________________________________
Intelligence officials are so enthusiastic about Intellipedia that they plan to provide access to Britain, Canada and Australia.
Even China could be granted access to help produce an unclassified intelligence estimate on the worldwide threat posed by infectious diseases.
More in story.
I wonder what happens to vandals.
Regards
*Keith Old*
Keith Old wrote:
Folks,
C/Net reports that the US intelligence community has launched its version of Wikipedia.
[...]
I wonder what happens to vandals.
Medals of Freedom, apparently.
:-/
Stan (soon to be shebs@gitmo.gov)
Fantastic. Over the years there have been these recurring stories about spies who go so caught up looking for secret information that they forgot to take into account the information that was already available.
A few years ago it was only low ranking USAF personnel that was trying to use Wikipedia to find out about the missiles on her base. So now it has reached the highest levels that Wikipedia information is superior to what is discovered by military intelligence. ;-)
Ec
Keith Old wrote:
Folks,
C/Net reports that the US intelligence community has launched its version of Wikipedia.
http://news.com.com/Intelligence+czar+unveils+spy+version+of+Wikipedia/2100-...
*The U.S. intelligence community on Tuesday unveiled its own secretive version of Wikipedia, saying the popular online encyclopedia format known for its openness is key to the future of American espionage.*
The office of U.S. intelligence czar John Negroponte announced Intellipedia, which allows intelligence analysts and other officials to collaboratively add and edit content on the government's classified Intelink Web much like its more famous namesake on the Webhttp://news.com.com/Study+Wikipedia+as+accurate+as+Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.html?tag=nl.
A "top secret" Intellipedia system, currently available to the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, has grown to more than 28,000 pages and 3,600 registered users since its introduction on April 17. Less restrictive versions exist for "secret" and "sensitive but unclassified" material.
Intellipedia is currently being used to assemble a major intelligence report, known as a national intelligence estimate, on Nigeria as well as the State Department's annual country reports on terrorism, officials said.
See also Chris Bronk's talk about Wikimania this year about Diplopedia, a pilot project within the U.S. Department of State to provide information to diplomats and increase information sharing within the department. I'm not sure if the projects are related. http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proceedings:CB1
-- phoebe
On 10/31/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Fantastic. Over the years there have been these recurring stories about spies who go so caught up looking for secret information that they forgot to take into account the information that was already available.
A few years ago it was only low ranking USAF personnel that was trying to use Wikipedia to find out about the missiles on her base. So now it has reached the highest levels that Wikipedia information is superior to what is discovered by military intelligence. ;-)
Ec
Keith Old wrote:
Folks,
C/Net reports that the US intelligence community has launched its version
of
Wikipedia.
http://news.com.com/Intelligence+czar+unveils+spy+version+of+Wikipedia/2100-...
*The U.S. intelligence community on Tuesday unveiled its own secretive version of Wikipedia, saying the popular online encyclopedia format known for its openness is key to the future of American espionage.*
The office of U.S. intelligence czar John Negroponte announced
Intellipedia,
which allows intelligence analysts and other officials to collaboratively add and edit content on the government's classified Intelink Web much
like
its more famous namesake on the Web<
http://news.com.com/Study+Wikipedia+as+accurate+as+Britannica/2100-1038_3-59...
.
A "top secret" Intellipedia system, currently available to the 16
agencies
that make up the U.S. intelligence community, has grown to more than
28,000
pages and 3,600 registered users since its introduction on April 17. Less restrictive versions exist for "secret" and "sensitive but unclassified" material.
Intellipedia is currently being used to assemble a major intelligence report, known as a national intelligence estimate, on Nigeria as well as
the
State Department's annual country reports on terrorism, officials said.
There's something interesting -- and a little sad -- going on here with respect to language evolution. Just about everyone has heard of Wikipedia by now, but most people don't know where the name comes from. So they're apt to seize on the wrong part of the word when creating derived terms. More and more we're seeing the stem "pedia" used to mean "an open, collaborative repository that anyone can quickly and easily edit". Sorry, Ward.
On 11/1/06, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
There's something interesting -- and a little sad -- going on here with respect to language evolution. Just about everyone has heard of Wikipedia by now, but most people don't know where the name comes from. So they're apt to seize on the wrong part of the word when creating derived terms. More and more we're seeing the stem "pedia" used to mean "an open, collaborative repository that anyone can quickly and easily edit". Sorry, Ward.
http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/WikiFur_Furry_Central http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Entryway http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet_Wiki http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
The issue is more likely that "pedia" stuck on the end of a word tends to flow better than having "wiki" crowbared in.
On 11/1/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/1/06, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
There's something interesting -- and a little sad -- going on here with respect to language evolution. Just about everyone has heard of Wikipedia by now, but most people don't know where the name comes from. So they're apt to seize on the wrong part of the word when creating derived terms. More and more we're seeing the stem "pedia" used to mean "an open, collaborative repository that anyone can quickly and easily edit". Sorry, Ward.
http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/WikiFur_Furry_Central http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Entryway http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet_Wiki http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
The issue is more likely that "pedia" stuck on the end of a word tends to flow better than having "wiki" crowbared in.
In this case both sides are appropriate. Intellipedia is a wiki, and it's an encyclopedia. But calling it "The Intelligence Wikipedia" would draw ire from the trademark wonks.
Still, it's a good thing Ward isn't as bigheaded as another free content leader. Wiki/Intellipedia anyone?
Anthony
Anthony wrote:
On 11/1/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/1/06, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
There's something interesting -- and a little sad -- going on here with respect to language evolution. Just about everyone has heard of Wikipedia by now, but most people don't know where the name comes from. So they're apt to seize on the wrong part of the word when creating derived terms. More and more we're seeing the stem "pedia" used to mean "an open, collaborative repository that anyone can quickly and easily edit". Sorry, Ward.
http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/WikiFur_Furry_Central http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Entryway http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet_Wiki http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
The issue is more likely that "pedia" stuck on the end of a word tends to flow better than having "wiki" crowbared in.
In this case both sides are appropriate. Intellipedia is a wiki, and it's an encyclopedia. But calling it "The Intelligence Wikipedia" would draw ire from the trademark wonks.
Still, it's a good thing Ward isn't as bigheaded as another free content leader. Wiki/Intellipedia anyone?
I didn't know that Hawaiian words could be trademarked.
On 11/1/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
In this case both sides are appropriate. Intellipedia is a wiki, and it's an encyclopedia. But calling it "The Intelligence Wikipedia" would draw ire from the trademark wonks.
Still, it's a good thing Ward isn't as bigheaded as another free content leader. Wiki/Intellipedia anyone?
I didn't know that Hawaiian words could be trademarked.
Wikipedia is not a Hawaiian word.
Of course, Hawaiian words *can* be trademarked. English words too. For instance, "Windows", "Apple", "Best", "Discover", etc.
Anthony
Steve Summit wrote:
There's something interesting -- and a little sad -- going on here with respect to language evolution. Just about everyone has heard of Wikipedia by now, but most people don't know where the name comes from. So they're apt to seize on the wrong part of the word when creating derived terms. More and more we're seeing the stem "pedia" used to mean "an open, collaborative repository that anyone can quickly and easily edit". Sorry, Ward.
For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge! It's hard to prevent the development of folk etymologies. Unless the real origins are always right there at the top of the main page this is bound to happen.
Ec
On 11/1/06, Keith Old keithold@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder what happens to vandals.
Or how they'll handle POV-pushing. I'm imagining rather humorous edit wars between characters with usenames like StateDeptDude and CIA4life.
FF