[Foundation-l] Muijzenberg #00 - (re)organizing wikimedia

[Birgitte SB]

--- Zack Clark <meta at world1tours.com> wrote:


> 
> Isn't "a world in which every single person is given
> free access to the sum of all human knowledge" a
> sufficiently gallant goal to go far??  I submit that
> if one thinks about it, a lousy 1% of said knowledge
> would unavoidably result in world peace and the
> elimination of poverty.  Yet, in this instance, it's
> not at all insane to shoot for an impossible goal,
> but instead - wholly inspiring.  Yet in stark
> contrast to any real respect for a grand knowledge
> quest, there seem to be an overriding concern for
> things like copyright infringement, libel, and
> pornography.  But lets be just a bit real here - OK?
>  I mean, the sum of *ALL* human knowledge is clearly
> nothing for the (freedom hating) squeamish!  How
> could such grim enlightenment avoid bitterly
> breaking illusion loving minds?  And how is it
> possible to even imagine approaching your goals
> without unleashing an irrational world of
> resentment.  You're barely out of the gate on this
> great venture, yet you've already put your head 
>  under the boot of the archenemy of truth &
> knowledge - the state.  How can you serve both at
> the same time?  Perpetually appeasing government
> only makes a complete sham of your proclaimed goal. 
> Of course, in all practicality, very few will ever
> notice notice any farce.  The easiest way to
> maintain a semblance of integrity is to simply &
> truthfully state your real goal as "... the sum of
> politically permitted pseudo knowledge."
> 

I think you are confusing information with knowledge. 
An interesting definition from the the Free On-Line
Definition of Computing is:

"If information is data plus meaning then
knowledge is information plus processing."

Not all information is knowledge.  Knowledge cannot be
copyrighted by any state.  Libelous material is a
subset of information that is unverified, which is
already against local policies.  Unverified
information is not knowledge.  From the standpoint of
what is knowledge, it does not matter at all what
courts may or may not decide is libel.  Policies
against censorship already exist although it is a
constant source of contraversy.  Such contraversy is
simply to be expected with an open project no matter
what the goals are.

By ensuring the Foundation is both legal and
respectable (as in responsible not censored!) does not
in any way make a sham of the stated goal "a world in
which every single person is given free access to the
sum of all human knowledge"  I personally do not
discern any lack of integrity in manner that WMF has
gone about this goal in a law-abiding manner.


Birgitte SB


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com