[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/jp/ - Otaku Culture


View post   

File: 346 KB, 1428x1425, Isolation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7463129 No.7463129 [Reply] [Original]

Fuck you guys... Fuck you guys so much

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_issues_in_Japan

>> No.7463139
File: 182 KB, 913x737, wiki.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7463139

>Wikipedia

>> No.7463147

I'm not a fan of wikipedia either.
The thing is, the model doesn't seem likely to die at all. It appeals to egotism and has a self-perpetuating hierarchy of wankery that will exist as long as the site has traffic. While there is a limited degree of quality control lest the site become discredited, what is lost in this process is non-bias

The Wikipedia model places quantity over quality in a manner slightly more focussed than general web articles and much more centralized. It is roughly the "google" hub of encyclopedic data, providing a projection for users to personalize much like personal websites only in a slightly uniform manner. What the site has done is successfully link together and integrate isolated personal sites into a cohesive whole. This doesn't mean that any of the people who run these sites are credible, non-biased, or not in it for petty personal reasons, but it does mean that it did become a major website.

Personally, I don't think there are many feasible alternatives on the web to this style if a site wants to be big. Enough quantity built up eventually yields some level of quality: What Wikipedia has done is tie together the bare minimum of compromise needed to engage the maximum number of users possible. It has effectively outproduced slow-moving scholarly or profit-based encyclopedias as a result

>> No.7463181
File: 93 KB, 723x461, 1290248922639.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7463181

>>7463139

>> No.7463187 [DELETED] 

>>7463147
is that a copy and paste rant from that one asshole who hates wikipedia? i hope you didn't waste your time writing that up. open and accessible is infinitely preferable over a closed circle with limited input and politically motivated. look at how much people shill and astroturf on wikipedia. if it was closed and could be easily influenced by mega donations like other crap publications the information wouldn't have any value.

it isn't the only source of information but it's probably less biased than most other god awful organizations which are completely bought out. if your information is correct then it should easily be able to find it.

>> No.7463217

I guess I'll never fully understand the Japanese.
Why do things such as the Comiket still exist today, in Two Thousand Ten?
You wait in line for hours on end while being subjected to the stench of sweaty armpits and dried semen coming from the people around you, you pay through your nose for your games and there's the chance you won't even make it to the stand before all the copies are sold out.
Indie Japanese developers should ditch physical copies and sell their stuff on Steam instead. Digital download means infinite copies, which in turn means infinite revenue, and the discounted price will discourage rampant piracy.
Plus you'll also have the privilege of having your own official place where to discuss games, instead of some lousy thread on 2ch that'll die in two hours.
What does /jp/ think about it? Would the thought of buying Touhou games on Steam entice you?

>> No.7463224

Only 1.6%?

>> No.7463227

>>7463217

Japan hates progress.

>> No.7463235

>>7463217

No.

>> No.7463278

>>7463187
Copy-pasted.
But really wikipedia is free of politically motivated entry? What motivates edit wars? You'd rather read up on the subject wrote by average Joe than an expert on the subject? It's good if you want some cheap quick information... is what I'd want to say but on the other hand now people use Wikipedia as a damn bible of truth or to self-diagnose a mental illness and are ready to show you how smart they are because they know about they've read about this subject and now they are expert. It destroy the value of information.

>> No.7463700

And an "Ethnic Issues in the United States" Wikipedia page would probably fill a 500 page book.

What's your point?

>>
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Action