from the world's big
Jimmy Wales on Jonathan Zittrain: The Future of the Internet
Jimmy Wales is an American Internet entrepreneur known for his role in the creation of Wikipedia, a free, open-content encyclopedia launched in 2001. He serves on the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, holding the board-appointed "community founder" seat. In 2004, he co-founded Wikia, a privately owned, free Web-hosting service, along with Angela Beesley.
Together with Larry Sanger and others, Wales helped lay the foundation for Wikipedia, which subsequently enjoyed rapid growth and popularity. As Wikipedia expanded and its public profile grew, Wales took on the role of the project's spokesman and promoter through speaking engagements and media appearances. Wales has been historically cited as the co-founder of Wikipedia but he disputes the "co-" designation, asserting that he is the sole founder of Wikipedia. Wales' work developing Wikipedia, which has become the world's largest encyclopedia, prompted Time magazine to name him in its 2006 list of the world's most influential people.
Born in Huntsville, Alabama, Wales attended a small private school, then a university preparation school, eventually attaining a bachelor's degree and master's degree in finance. During his graduate studies he taught at two universities.
Question: Do you agree with Jonathan Zittrain that the current incarnation of the Web is unsustainable?
Jimmy Wales: Not completely. But he makes an argument that I think everybody should take very, very seriously. And just to summarize it in my own words as best that I can, what he talks about is how fabulous and amazing and wonderful the radical openness of the internet platform is. But also all of the amazing problems that we have to put up with because of it. Problems from spam-- is one of the most notorious-- but viruses, people hi-jacking computers. You know, there’re thought to be right now hundreds of thousands of computers that have been hi-jacked secretly to send out spam and do other nefarious things. These giant bot-nets of Window’s computers that’ve been hacked. That’s troubling. And what he suggests is that people are gonna get fed up with it, and they’re gonna actually start demanding devices that’re more locked down. And so things like your iPhone. It’s a pretty locked down platform, and there’s not a whole lot you can do with it. And that raises a lot of concern for a lot of people. I’m a little more optimistic, because I think it’s really hard to replace the open nature of the internet and the values that it generates. And any kind of closed network system is going to be that it can’t fully compete. But I do think it’s something that we need to be pretty vigilant about. And in part, I think we need to be not too-- we should not be excessively concerned. We need to be concerned, but not excessively concerned about initiatives to change certain internet protocols in a way that might help. I mean, one of the things right now is that we’ve struggled for many, many years with the spam problem. And it doesn’t seem to be getting any better. It gets-- for me, personally-- it seems to go in waves. It gets better for a while when I upgrade my filtering software; and then it gets bad again. And we can contrast this to something like Facebook. I use Facebook for a lot of messages nowadays, because I just never get spam there. But I hope we don’t see all email traffic moving onto a single proprietary platform like Facebook. And so part of the answer there is to say, “Look, maybe what we need is an email 2.0 protocol that allows for certain kinds of controls, that allows for ways for the community to exclude people.” Of course, I’m not the first person who’s said this, and I absolutely have no clever ideas about how to do it, unfortunately. But if somebody had such and initiative, I think it’d be wise to look at it and support it, and say, “Look, actually what we need is a neutral platform, lots of different people can participate in. It’s just as open as email. And it’s not bound to one vendor. And yet, it actually works for a change, instead of being a complete disaster, like email is.”
Question: What is the biggest Web security threat on the horizon?
Jimmy Wales: I think just more of the same. I don’t think-- a lot of people worry about some kind of sort of apocalyptic virus that sort of brings most of the internet down for a month or something. I don’t think that’s too likely. Mostly because the kinds of people who have resources to put into doing something like that, don’t have any interest in bringing down the whole internet. Spammers, for example, spend a lot of time and effort. These sort of criminal bot-nets that spend time trying to steal people’s credit card information and things like that. Well, they have no interest in shutting down the internet, you know? They need it to buy stolen goods with the stolen credit card numbers. So those’re the kinds of things that I don’t worry about too much. I guess the main thing is just more of the same. More viruses and sort of nonsense and spam and junk on your computer. But I’m more of an optimist than JZ is, so.
Recorded on: 04/30/2008
Jonathan Zittrain says the Internet in its current incarnation is unsustainable. Wales doesn’t totally agree.
Educators and administrators must build new supports for faculty and student success in a world where the classroom might become virtual in the blink of an eye.
- If you or someone you know is attending school remotely, you are more than likely learning through emergency remote instruction, which is not the same as online learning, write Rich DeMillo and Steve Harmon.
- Education institutions must properly define and understand the difference between a course that is designed from inception to be taught in an online format and a course that has been rapidly converted to be offered to remote students.
- In a future involving more online instruction than any of us ever imagined, it will be crucial to meticulously design factors like learner navigation, interactive recordings, feedback loops, exams and office hours in order to maximize learning potential within the virtual environment.
Placing science and religion at opposite ends of the belief spectrum is to ignore their unique purposes.
- Science and religion (fact versus faith) are often seen as two incongruous groups. When you consider the purpose of each and the questions that they seek to answer, the comparison becomes less black and white.
- This video features religious scholars, a primatologist, a neuroendocrinologist, a comedian, and other brilliant minds considering, among other things, the evolutionary function that religion serves, the power of symbols, and the human need to learn, explore, and know the world around us so that it becomes a less scary place.
- "I think most people are actually kind of comfortable with the idea that science is a reliable way to learn about nature, but it's not the whole story and there's a place also for religion, for faith, for theology, for philosophy," says Francis Collins, American geneticist and director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). "But that harmony perspective doesn't get as much attention. Nobody is as interested in harmony as they are in conflict."
Studying voice recordings of infected but asymptomatic people reveals potential indicators of Covid-19.
A leading British space scientist thinks there is life under the ice sheets of Europa.
- A British scientist named Professor Monica Grady recently came out in support of extraterrestrial life on Europa.
- Europa, the sixth largest moon in the solar system, may have favorable conditions for life under its miles of ice.
- The moon is one of Jupiter's 79.
Neil deGrasse Tyson wants to go ice fishing on Europa<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="GLGsRX7e" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="f4790eb8f0515e036b24c4195299df28"> <div id="botr_GLGsRX7e_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/GLGsRX7e-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/GLGsRX7e-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/GLGsRX7e-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div>
Water Vapor Above Europa’s Surface Deteced for First Time<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9c4abc8473e1b89170cc8941beeb1f2d"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WQ-E1lnSOzc?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
A study finds people are more influenced by what the other party says than their own. What gives?
- A new study has found evidence suggesting that conservative climate skepticism is driven by reactions to liberal support for science.
- This was determined both by comparing polling data to records of cues given by leaders, and through a survey.
- The findings could lead to new methods of influencing public opinion.