As John Gruber wrote, I never thought I’d say it but I agree with Grover Norquist.
The problem with the original Google Books plan was “the agreement gives too much market power to Google over out-of-print books. How’s that again? Out-of-print books, by definition, are those for which there is no market today, nor likely to be one any time in the future.”
Jimmy Wales schools Poynter in how Wikipedia and the Internet work. Funny read. Best quotation: “There is no move to restrict editing on Wikipedia pages of living people. The rest of your question is negated by this fact.”
Interesting list of security, forensics, and general troubleshooting tools for the Mac OS X platform.
2 thoughts on “Grab bag: Gitmo no mo”
I also found Jimmy Wales’ unnecessarily condescending attitude toward the media to be funny, considering that Wikipedia (as a tertiary source) depends on the media to populate it with content.
Also funny to see Wales mock the “five years out of touch” aspects of the media, in that Wales’ outdated, “already been tried by DMOZ” Wikia Search project was a horrific failure that left two people unemployed.
So, is that how someone “schools” Poynter?
Greg — when it comes to the AP and their hamhanded attempts to crack down on fair use, I think they deserve a little condescension from time to time.
But the part where Wales addressed Poynter directly was spot on. They repeated the meme that Wikipedia was going to make it harder to edit pages of living people. Wales explained that the change was in moving from a system where you had to be registered to edit, and in many cases the pages couldn’t even be edited by newly registered users anyway. to a system where anyone could submit the edits but they would be reviewed first. If you’ve ever patrolled spam on Wikipedia you’d know why this was a positive change and why it is more open than what was there before.
This is the thing that’s maddening about the media’s coverage of Wikipedia. WP puts all its policies and discussions out in the open–and reporters still get it wrong! What do they do in their reporting when the subject does NOT put everything out in the open?