Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0039636334 = product of:
  0.035672702 = sum of:
    0.035672702 = product of:
      0.071345404 = sum of:
        0.071345404 = weight(_text_:seite in 4263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071345404 = score(doc=4263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16469958 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.4331851 = fieldWeight in 4263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Mit Wikipedia schien ein Traum wahr geworden zu sein - das Wissen der Menschheit, zusammengetragen in einem Gemeinschaftsprojekt, kostenlos, für alle verfügbar und frei von Kommerz, im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes die beste Seite des Internet. Obwohl nur ein Prozent der Weltbevölkerung betreffend, ist die deutsche Wikipedia dabei die zweitgrößte Abteilung - auch das schien eine besondere Erfolgsgeschichte. Und tatsächlich ist die Enzyklopädie nach wie vor unschlagbar bei Dingen wie Beethovens Geburtsdatum oder der Anzahl der Jupitermonde. Nähert man sich aber der Gegenwart in irgendeinem Artikel mit politisch-gesellschaftlichem Bezug, kommt man ins Staunen.

0.0015378521 = product of:
  0.013840669 = sum of:
    0.013840669 = product of:
      0.027681338 = sum of:
        0.027681338 = weight(_text_:web in 2139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027681338 = score(doc=2139,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 2139, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2139)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Google or Wikipedia? Those of us who search online -- and who doesn't? -- are getting referred more and more to Wikipedia. For the past two years, this free online "encyclopedia of the people" has been topping the lists of the world's most popular websites. But do we really know what we're using? Backlight plunges into the story behind Wikipedia and explores the wonderful world of Web 2.0. Is it a revolution, or pure hype? Director IJsbrand van Veelen goes looking for the truth behind Wikipedia. Only five people are employed by the company, and all its activities are financed by donations and subsidies. The online encyclopedia that everyone can contribute to and revise is now even bigger than the illustrious Encyclopedia Britannica. Does this spell the end for traditional institutions of knowledge such as Britannica? And should we applaud this development as progress or mourn it as a loss? How reliable is Wikipedia? Do "the people" really hold the lease on wisdom? And since when do we believe that information should be free for all? In this film, "Wikipedians," the folks who spend their days writing and editing articles, explain how the online encyclopedia works. In addition, the parties involved discuss Wikipedia's ethics and quality of content. It quickly becomes clear that there are camps of both believers and critics. Wiki's Truth introduces us to the main players in the debate: Jimmy Wales (founder and head Wikipedian), Larry Sanger (co-founder of Wikipedia, now head of Wiki spin-off Citizendium), Andrew Keen (author of The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy), Phoebe Ayers (a Wikipedian in California), Ndesanjo Macha (Swahili Wikipedia, digital activist), Tim O'Reilly (CEO of O'Reilly Media, the "inventor" of Web 2.0), Charles Leadbeater (philosopher and author of We Think, about crowdsourcing), and Robert McHenry (former editor-in-chief of Encyclopedia Britannica). Opening is a video by Chris Pirillo. The questions surrounding Wikipedia lead to a bigger discussion of Web 2.0, a phenomenon in which the user determines the content. Examples include YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, and Wikipedia. These sites would appear to provide new freedom and opportunities for undiscovered talent and unheard voices, but just where does the boundary lie between expert and amateur? Who will survive according to the laws of this new "digital Darwinism"? Are equality and truth really reconcilable ideals? And most importantly, has the Internet brought us wisdom and truth, or is it high time for a cultural counterrevolution?

Object

Web 2.0

0.0010874257 = product of:
  0.009786831 = sum of:
    0.009786831 = product of:
      0.019573662 = sum of:
        0.019573662 = weight(_text_:web in 1244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019573662 = score(doc=1244,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 1244, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1244)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The creation of services linking related information entities is an area that is attracting an ever increasing interest in the ongoing development of the World Wide Web in general, and of research-related information systems in particular. Currently, both practice and theory point at linking services as being a major domain for innovation enabled by digital communication of content. Publishers, subscription agents, researchers and libraries are all looking into ways to create added value by linking related information entities, as such presenting the information within a broader context estimated to be relevant to the users of the information. This is the first of two articles in D-Lib Magazine on this topic. This first part describes the current state-of-the-art and contrasts various approaches to the problem. It identifies static and dynamic linking solutions as well as open and closed linking frameworks. It also includes an extensive bibliography. The second part, SFX, a Generic Linking Solution describes a system that we have developed for linking in a hybrid working environment. The creation of services linking related information entities is an area that is attracting an ever increasing interest in the ongoing development of the World Wide Web in general, and of research-related information systems in particular. Although most writings on electronic scientific communication have touted other benefits, such as the increase in communication speed, the possibility to exchange multimedia content and the absence of limitations on the length of research papers, currently both practice and theory point at linking services as being a major opportunity for improved communication of content. Publishers, subscription agents, researchers and libraries are all looking into ways to create added-value by linking related information entities, as such presenting the information within a broader context estimated to be relevant to the users of the information.

9.514975E-4 = product of:
  0.008563478 = sum of:
    0.008563478 = product of:
      0.017126955 = sum of:
        0.017126955 = weight(_text_:web in 1170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017126955 = score(doc=1170,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.17847323 = fieldWeight in 1170, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1170)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

This illustrates a stark reality of the Web. There are many resources for environmental content, but there is no central repository of authoritative information that meets the needs of diverse user communities. The Encyclopedia of Earth aims to fill that niche by providing content that is both free and reliable. Still in its infancy, the EoE already is an integral part of the emerging effort to increase free and open access to trusted information on the Web. It is a trusted content source for authoritative indexes such as the Online Access to Research in the Environment Initiative, the Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative, the Open Education Resources Commons, Scirus, DLESE, WiserEarth, among others. Our initial Content Partners include the American Institute of Physics, the University of California Museum of Paleontology, TeacherServe®, the U.S. Geological Survey, the International Arctic Science Committee, the World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International, the Biodiversity Institute of Ontario, and the United Nations Environment Programme, to name just a few. The full partner list here can be found at <http://www.eoearth.org/article/Content_Partners>. We have a diversity of article types including standard subject articles, biographies, place-based entries, country profiles, and environmental classics. We recently launched our E-Book series, full-text, fully searchable books with internal hyperlinks to EoE articles. The eBooks include new releases by distinguished scholars as well as classics such as Walden and On the Origin of Species. Because history can be an important guide to the future, we have added an Environmental Classics section that includes such historical works as Energy from Fossil Fuels by M. King Hubbert and Undersea by Rachel Carson. Our services and features will soon be expanded. The EoE will soon be available in different languages giving a wider range of users access, users will be able to search it geographically or by a well-defined, expert created taxonomy, and teachers will be able to use the EoE to create unique curriculum for their courses.