[Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

[David Gerard]

On 4 September 2011 20:38, Kim Bruning <kim at bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:29:25PM +0100, Thomas Dalton wrote:

>> They won't be educated *as much*. They can still be educated. If they
>> don't use Wikipedia at all because of fear of seeing things they don't
>> want to see (or, because their parents fear they will see things their
>> parents thing they shouldn't see), then they aren't getting educated
>> by Wikipedia at all. Seeing almost all of Wikipedia is better than
>> seeing none of it.

> Seeing *almost* all of wikipedia introduces potential bias, which
> can actually be rather much worse than seeing none of wikipedia
> at all.
> I think we have a rule about that.


Yes (maybe). It's not at all clear that this use case should not be
ignored to avoid the possibility of compromising the encyclopedia.

I have to ask: if there's such a demand for a censored Wikipedia,
where are the third-party providers? Anyone? This is a serious
question. Even workplace filtermakers don't censor Wikipedia, as far
as I know.


- d.