3 ms·
Qwiki seems mostly to me like an attempt to "multimedia-ize" the information on the web. This seems the wrong way to go. What the web is lacking isn't breadth o
by noamsml 16y ago
Qwiki seems mostly to me like an attempt to "multimedia-ize" the information on the web. This seems the wrong way to go. What the web is lacking isn't breadth or engagement capacity. Hell, Wikipedia has engagement capacity. What the web lacks is information with the depth, quality and low entry barrier of textbooks. You can have depth and quality with stuff like Google Scholar, but the barrier of entry is absurd, and you can have breadth with a plethora of other sites, but without expertise on the matter at hand you'll only find shallow information directed at the general public. WikiBooks and OpenCourseWare are probably good examples of things which are helping alleviate with lack.
- phlux 16y agoI disagree. Eventually, Qwiki can provide a very very good lesson on varied topics in a very consumable manner. Ever see the movie 'Dune'? Where Paul is learning about Arakis on the video terminal? That is what Qwiki is doing - as a platform. Eventually - it will be able to take the deeper, more broad content and do the same thing. Providing an hour long info-mentary on a subject based on widely dispersed information across the web. Video from varied sources, pics, wikipedia articles etc... Dont lok at what Qwiki may be today -- think about what Qwiki will be in 5 years. Imagine if qwiki also incorporates WordLens technology as well - in 5 years - it will be able to translate and read to you PDFs in multiple languages.