5 ms·

Rather than just complaining about Wikipedia, I would love to see 2 smart guys in a garage create a competitor.

by rokhayakebe 18y ago

pb30 18y ago
http://citizendium.org/ http://citizendium.org/ ?
- rokhayakebe 18y ago
  Maybe, although they need to work on the UI. But good start.
- gojomo 18y ago
  That's the wrong direction: more selective. The right direction: Wikipedia with a constitutional bias against deletionism. Only false, illegal, or privacy-violating information should be deleted. Everything true should be welcomed.
  - hugh 18y ago
    Sweet! You should start one of those. I look forward to creating the article "List of random numbers generated by hugh's random number generator on September 18, 2008".
    - gojomo 18y ago
      At some point, an excessive contributor would have to sponsor their own material. It's a business model!
    - rsheridan6 18y ago
      That would be a useless article, but it would be harmless, assuming a sane policy that doesn't allow for terabyte-long articles that strain server resources. Nobody would link to it and nobody would read it, even if your really posted it - which you wouldn't, because you have better things to do.
    - william42 18y ago
      I look forward to watching it turn into the 4chan wiki.
hugh 18y ago
It's trivially easy for two smart guys in a garage to create a competitor. It's difficult to persuade hundreds of thousands of people outside said garage to write the actual content.
- echair 18y ago
  I think most people would understand "create a competitor" to entail more than the strawman of mere implementation you seem to be taking it to mean.
  - hugh 18y ago
    The point is that the main problem can't be solved at the two-guys-in-a-garage level. Two guys in a garage can create a wiki. Two guys in a garage with a million dollar PR budget can create a wiki and get it widely publicised. Two guys in a garage with a fifty million dollar budget can hire a bunch of writers to get the content kickstarted. But ultimately, the problem of persuading thousands of people to contribute to a brand new service is not a problem that anyone knows how to solve -- it either takes off or it doesn't.
    - netcan 18y ago
      Well. It's a problem requiring a creative solution. It's certainly hard. I don't know how to do it, but I wouldn't say it's impossible or all up to fate.
    - rsheridan6 18y ago
      The two guys have an advantage - lots of former editors are sick of Wikipedia, and non-deletionists have nowhere to go. I don't see any reason why two guys in a garage couldn't succeed.
- rms 18y ago
  Fork it.
staticshock 18y ago
1) what does "competitor" translate to, for non-profits? 2) why write new source if your goal is just to launch another wiki?
corentin 18y ago
It was created years ago and it's called the world wide web.
- rbanffy 18y ago
  True, but it was created by one guy and one NeXT cube in a particle accelerator ;-) Talk about odd partnerships.

Rather than just complaining about Wikipedia, I would love to see 2 smart guys in a garage create a competitor.

pb30 18y ago

http://citizendium.org/ http://citizendium.org/ ?

rokhayakebe 18y ago
Maybe, although they need to work on the UI. But good start.
gojomo 18y ago
That's the wrong direction: more selective. The right direction: Wikipedia with a constitutional bias against deletionism. Only false, illegal, or privacy-violating information should be deleted. Everything true should be welcomed.
- hugh 18y ago
  Sweet! You should start one of those. I look forward to creating the article "List of random numbers generated by hugh's random number generator on September 18, 2008".
  - gojomo 18y ago
    At some point, an excessive contributor would have to sponsor their own material. It's a business model!
  - rsheridan6 18y ago
    That would be a useless article, but it would be harmless, assuming a sane policy that doesn't allow for terabyte-long articles that strain server resources. Nobody would link to it and nobody would read it, even if your really posted it - which you wouldn't, because you have better things to do.
  - william42 18y ago
    I look forward to watching it turn into the 4chan wiki.

hugh 18y ago

It's trivially easy for two smart guys in a garage to create a competitor. It's difficult to persuade hundreds of thousands of people outside said garage to write the actual content.

echair 18y ago
I think most people would understand "create a competitor" to entail more than the strawman of mere implementation you seem to be taking it to mean.
- hugh 18y ago
  The point is that the main problem can't be solved at the two-guys-in-a-garage level. Two guys in a garage can create a wiki. Two guys in a garage with a million dollar PR budget can create a wiki and get it widely publicised. Two guys in a garage with a fifty million dollar budget can hire a bunch of writers to get the content kickstarted. But ultimately, the problem of persuading thousands of people to contribute to a brand new service is not a problem that anyone knows how to solve -- it either takes off or it doesn't.
  - netcan 18y ago
    Well. It's a problem requiring a creative solution. It's certainly hard. I don't know how to do it, but I wouldn't say it's impossible or all up to fate.
  - rsheridan6 18y ago
    The two guys have an advantage - lots of former editors are sick of Wikipedia, and non-deletionists have nowhere to go. I don't see any reason why two guys in a garage couldn't succeed.
rms 18y ago
Fork it.

staticshock 18y ago

1) what does "competitor" translate to, for non-profits? 2) why write new source if your goal is just to launch another wiki?

corentin 18y ago

It was created years ago and it's called the world wide web.

rbanffy 18y ago
True, but it was created by one guy and one NeXT cube in a particle accelerator ;-) Talk about odd partnerships.