On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 02:37:20PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >So call me a sociopath, but times are a bit scary.  I'd like to do the
> >2000's equivalent of the 1960's bomb shelter, and have my very own
> >snapshot in case of major local/regional internet disruption, etc.
> 
> wikipedia is just a pile of junk. everyone can put in it, and 
> unfortunately do.

Meanwhile, in print encyclopedias, I see that with restricted writing
access and strict editing processes there are typically systemic biases
and subtler mistakes that are much easier to overlook -- and the mistakes
not only persist until the next edition, but often exist for decades,
whereas finding a mistake in Wikipedia is fixable within five minutes.


> 
> in EVERY article i watched in area i have knowlege there were bugs. in 
> most - big nonsenses.

The key is that an encyclopedia should never be the *end* of your
research.  It's basically just a place to look for key terms to research
elsewhere, and to get a general overview of some common takes on various
subjects.  That's as true of Wikipedia as it is of any other
encyclopedia.


> 
> >snapshot on DVDs or disk as a fundraiser?  I'd drop $300 for some sort
> >of officially licenced copy, I suspect there are other freaks that
> >would too...
> 
> wget should do. select an option to limit downloads to wikipedia, but with 
> unlimited recursion, start from almost any place.

Bad idea.  Just get one of the periodic database dumps.  Using recursive
wget downloads is a good way to consume mass bandwidth and get your IP
banned from accessing it.  Please be aware of others' needs, and
courteous in your treatment of those needs.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ]
Friedrich Nietzche: "Those who know that they are profound strive for
clarity.  Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for
obscurity."

Attachment: pgpfV8fr8GMGD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to