Democratizing Media In The Era Of Blockchain

[iii]

Probably too scared to stand against me and my fearsome gang of septi- and octagenarians that are probably mostly gone now.

Could you do us a favor and do the same? I'm going to put you in the ignore pile now. It's a very rarefied bunch, but you've proven yourself worthy with your Daily Caller linking and your comments about "states that count".

[Midsize Jake]

Trump's still got a majority approval rating at the mid-terms and Everipedia has finished importing all 430,000 Korean Wikipedia pages to give my encyclopedia a fully operational majority over English Wikipedia today. Here's one as an entirely blue-linked example.

Look, I'm sorry that we keep putting this kind of pressure on you, compelling you to make even wilder spiraling counter-claims in your defense, but here in the USA we're trying to stop our country from sliding into fascism. So we're not going to stop. The facts are on the side of democracy and freedom - our side - and they always have been. (Also, Trump's aggregate approval ratings have hovered around 40 percent for his entire term so far, including right now, which is quite an achievement since they should be hovering around zero percent.) You're just digging the hole deeper, because everything you're saying is easily refuted - and because of my personal feelings about the far right, I'm not even going to do you any favors by temporarily "muting" you or whatever. I'm just going to let you keep making it worse, if you insist on doing that.

So please, let's just go back to discussing web-based encyclopedia management in the Blockchain Era, OK? Is that too much to ask? I can move the political posts (which are really off-topic anyway) to a private subforum if it makes you feel better.

[Jim]

encyclopedist

Is that what we're calling him these days?
We don't even call Wikipedians that!

It's a term I've occasionally seen a couple of folks use, both in usernames, and descriptively in prose. Bit over the top, if you ask me. Works when used sarcastically, though...

[Midsize Jake]

It's a term I've occasionally seen a couple of folks use, both in usernames, and descriptively in prose. Bit over the top, if you ask me.

I looked it up, and it's a real word...

I'm just trying to be as magnanimous as possible. I assume that his goal is to be considered an encyclopedist, so I'm saying he should avoid the appearance of bias in order to be more successful as an encyclopedist - I'm not making a judgement as to whether or not he deserves to have that term applied to him now, or to anyone else who contributes to Everipedia.

And let's be fair, it's been almost 18 years and there are a few Wikipedians who could be fairly described as "encyclopedists" at this point - people who have been at it for a long time now and still operate as though it's an important responsibility to get things right and maintain some sort of standard, low though it may be. To the extent that they know who they are, they should be proud of this. The problem is that it isn't just the experienced veterans who want to be described as such, it's the neophytes and hacks as well, along with people who are just there to advance some sort of ideological agenda. And their rules make it hard to even tell the difference, much less actually apply the distinction as a real thing.

[Jim]

It's a term I've occasionally seen a couple of folks use, both in usernames, and descriptively in prose. Bit over the top, if you ask me.

I looked it up, and it's a real word...

Oh, I know. I've looked it up too.

I guess you're right and I'm being a bit cruel - there's probably nothing wrong with people who seriously pursue online encyclopedism as their hobby wanting to be known as, or being referred to as, encyclopedists, in a similar way to preferring 'editor' over 'user'.

[WhoReallyCares]

Regarding Bedson's 'credibility', I note that he claims on his Everipedia autobiography that when standing in a 2011 local election for Plymouth City Council, as a UKIP candidate, he came third, "beating the Liberal Democrat candidate". There was no Liberal Democrat candidate for that ward: https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/votingandel ... ionresults

No, you have this wrong, but I think you'll struggle to get a proper answer from Paul.

On Everipedia Paul claims his efforts assisted in "helping UKIP beat the Liberal Democrat candidates". Note the plural. The official results are shown below. You'll see that overall UKIP did indeed beat the Libs, even though Paul didn't get to spar with them in St Budeaux. The confusion arises because that Everipedia article is so poorly written.

http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2011/102/

[Midsize Jake]

You'll see that overall UKIP did indeed beat the Libs, even though Paul didn't get to spar with them in St Budeaux. The confusion arises because that Everipedia article is so poorly written.

Well, all this really proves is that the Plymouth City Council has been controlled by the iron fist of George Soros for the better part of a decade.

[Jim]

Regarding Bedson's 'credibility', I note that he claims on his Everipedia autobiography that when standing in a 2011 local election for Plymouth City Council, as a UKIP candidate, he came third, "beating the Liberal Democrat candidate". There was no Liberal Democrat candidate for that ward: https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/votingandel ... ionresults

No, you have this wrong, but I think you'll struggle to get a proper answer from Paul.

On Everipedia Paul claims his efforts assisted in "helping UKIP beat the Liberal Democrat candidates". Note the plural. The official results are shown below. You'll see that overall UKIP did indeed beat the Libs, even though Paul didn't get to spar with them in St Budeaux. The confusion arises because that Everipedia article is so poorly written.

http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2011/102/

Pretty sure that Mr. Bedson edited that after Mr. TheGrump pointed it out here. See Mr. Bedson's subsequent post above where he said, in small font: "Thanks, corrected my bio", and the only archive wayback has, here: https://web.archive.org/web/20180609105 ... ul-bedson/ where it indeed says "This improved to 579 votes and 17.4% of the vote in 2011 coming 3rd and beating the Liberal Democrat​ candidate."

I'd point you to Everipedia's revision history, but I couldn't see an obvious link to that on the 'live' page at a glance, and I can't be bothered digging for it.

[WhoReallyCares]

Regarding Bedson's 'credibility', I note that he claims on his Everipedia autobiography that when standing in a 2011 local election for Plymouth City Council, as a UKIP candidate, he came third, "beating the Liberal Democrat candidate". There was no Liberal Democrat candidate for that ward: https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/votingandel ... ionresults

No, you have this wrong, but I think you'll struggle to get a proper answer from Paul.

On Everipedia Paul claims his efforts assisted in "helping UKIP beat the Liberal Democrat candidates". Note the plural. The official results are shown below. You'll see that overall UKIP did indeed beat the Libs, even though Paul didn't get to spar with them in St Budeaux. The confusion arises because that Everipedia article is so poorly written.

http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2011/102/

Pretty sure that Mr. Bedson edited that after Mr. TheGrump pointed it out here. See Mr. Bedson's subsequent post above where he said, in small font: "Thanks, corrected my bio", and the only archive wayback has, here: https://web.archive.org/web/20180609105 ... ul-bedson/ where it indeed says "This improved to 579 votes and 17.4% of the vote in 2011 coming 3rd and beating the Liberal Democrat​ candidate."

I'd point you to Everipedia's revision history, but I couldn't see an obvious link to that on the 'live' page at a glance, and I can't be bothered digging for it.

Yep -- you're right and I'm wrong. Paul has gone from beating a phantom Liberal candidate to "helping" his party beat the Liberals as a whole.

Paul: that was mischievous. On another note, why do your inline citations throw up 404s? And where's the revision history link?

[Jim]

And where's the revision history link?

There's one visible on the wayback link I gave. Maybe you need to be logged in to see it on the new 'blockchain' version.

I don't know because I don't have an account - their signup 'tutorial' also gives me a 404, but last time I looked, and was able to access it, it lost me at "credit card".

[Paul Bedson]

Paul: that was mischievous. On another note, why do your inline citations throw up 404s? And where's the revision history link?

a) Yes it was, sorry about my tiny text. Well spotted Jim (he's a hawk, that Jim) b) Which citations throw up 404s? I don't think all of them do. Like all of Wikipedia's broken links, they may need fixing. Jump on in there and fix them. PM me for an account. I owe you one. You can make up to $5 per half hour (at the mo, still a testing rate) c) Revision history is accessible via the icon that looks like a ballot box in the top left corner of the page.

The new UX team implemented a new Recent Activity page a couple of days ago where you can edit, vote or view articles as they pop up on Everipedia. I had a lovely half hour telegram chat with one Danielle Diamond from Everipedia's new UX team the other night and asked her for all the good bits of Wikipedia to be added. They're coming soon with editor action histories, analytics and all that stuff you guys love.



And as requested, to drag this thread back onto encyclopedist tracks and away from the political rollercoaster, here's a great new article someone wrote about us today.

The conclusion is brilliant:

With everything above in mind, there are many reasons why you should make an Everipedia page but definitely a few why you SHOULD NOT (see below):

You should not make an Everipedia page if you hate money, and don’t want IQ tokens.
You should not make an Everipedia page if you have no interest in building yourself or brand as an authority figure.
You should not make an Everipedia page if you prefer an Atlas over Google Maps, Waze, or any other modern technology.

[Poetlister]

The majority in the states that counted voted for Trump

Which states didn't count? California? New York? All of the many states where Trump didn't get majority?

collectively we beat the Liberal Democrat candidate(s)

That's not quite the same as saying that you personally beat a particular candidate. I've heard of special pleading, but this is ridiculous.

[WhoReallyCares]

Paul: that was mischievous. On another note, why do your inline citations throw up 404s? And where's the revision history link?

a) Yes it was, sorry about my tiny text. Well spotted Jim (he's a hawk, that Jim) b) Which citations throw up 404s? I don't think all of them do. Like all of Wikipedia's broken links, they may need fixing. Jump on in there and fix them. PM me for an account. I owe you one. You can make up to $5 per half hour (at the mo, still a testing rate) c) Revision history is accessible via the icon that looks like a ballot box in the top left corner of the page.

Thanks Paul. I'll PM you a username and password later today.

So you reckon I can earn 10 USD p/h. But what happens when I want to cash in my chips? Will I get real money? And can you do bank transfers [my bank's in Hong Kong, btw]?

[Jim]

Revision history is accessible via the icon that looks like a ballot box in the top left corner of the page.

Which seems completely non-intuitive to me, and is why I didn't know where to find it, since when you hover the tooltip says 'Vote'. I didn't want to 'vote' - not even for an imaginary Liberal Democrat candidate - I wanted to see the revision history.

Anyway, I click it and get a long list of coloured boxes, each containing a name (presumably the user making the edit) and a timespan (presumably corresponding to when that version was active/live). Also a couple of long strings of alphanumeric characters which I assume are some kind of blockchain identifiers.

Lovely, so I click the first coloured box and I'm presented with a version where the text still reads "This improved to 579 votes and 17.4% of the vote in 2011 coming 3rd and beating the Liberal Democrat ​ candidate."

Ok, I can see old revisions now. Where can I see a diff (what changed between one revision and the next)? Again it's not immediately obvious to me how to do that - but I've only looked briefly and I am probably missing something.

[Jim]

And now, later, when I click the url I linked above which had the old text when I wrote that post, the 'version' is different to what I got then, reading: "This improved to 579 votes and 17.4% of the vote in 2011 coming 3rd and helping UKIP beat the Liberal Democrat candidates." (i.e. what you changed it to) - so it seems linking to an old revision gives a different result later? Do you have the WMF Visual Editor 'team' working on your software, by any chance? It seems to be showing eerily similar usability and consistency characteristics.

[Paul Bedson]

Thanks Paul. I'll PM you a username and password later today.

So you reckon I can earn 10 USD p/h. But what happens when I want to cash in my chips? Will I get real money? And can you do bank transfers [my bank's in Hong Kong, btw]?

Please do, I said you could earn "up to" 10 USD p/h currently. Unfortunately, at busy times you probably won't get close to that, which is a shame because I think a writer of your calibre deserves at least that. I expect 10 USD p/h is about the right level to motivate a professional writer to contribute their time. Your position in Hong Kong is especially interesting however as we are dealing with a huge influx of Far Eastern articles that need modding and clean up. I suspect the team could really use your help, so there may be opportunities to earn more outside the rewards system if you get involved.

Until you're trained on crypto, I can send you a paypal transfer in exchange for you sending me IQ tokens you've earned. If you can figure out how to use coinbase (for fiat to BTC/ETH) and a register on a crypto-exchange, like Chaince (the one I use, although heard OTCBTC and UpBit might be better) then I'll burn the keys and you can cash out at will. It'll get a lot easier to cash out if Coinbase start doing fiat-EOS & IQ pairs next year.

Ok, I can see old revisions now. Where can I see a diff (what changed between one revision and the next)? Again it's not immediately obvious to me how to do that - but I've only looked briefly and I am probably missing something.

You would have hated it last week when the revision history was in html code. I could barely read that!

There is a bug that I've added to the buglist with that edit on my bio. You should be able to see the revision history with a red and green highlight on before and after blocks of text I have changed but for some reason it's not working on that edit. I've asked for investigation. It only updated to WYSIWYG last week so I hope you'll excuse the initial bugginess there.

You can see a revision history better here on a page I made for an up-and-coming fashion designer from Florida.

I fixed a typo and changed his "Big Dream" campaign to "Dream Big", which is displaying lovely in this edit with red (before) and green (after) changes to the text.

This is an example of how professional editors can make rewards by editing Everipedia outside the cryptocurrency system incidentally as Peter Jean-Marie contacted me privately with a request to make his page, in return for which he is sending me one of his designer neckties (usually $30 + postage from the Florida to the UK) so I can look extra smart at my upcoming business meetings. I chose "Faded Coin" and was really inspired by Peter's attitude and dreams, so thought I would mention and promote him here too. There's no rules against getting paid for editing in designer neckties on Everipedia after all.

[WhoReallyCares]

Paul: that was mischievous. On another note, why do your inline citations throw up 404s? And where's the revision history link?

Which citations throw up 404s? I don't think all of them do.

Hey Paul, here's your Everipedia page:

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/paul-bedson/

Clicking on any inline citation gives me a 404.

This is your list of articles written by Paul Bedson:

https://everipedia.org/wiki/QmW1jTxMmth ... En8YVaBe6/

Clicking on your name in the first sentence throws a 404.

The [unfinished] article I wrote: Persian embassy to Siam (1685–1687)

https://everipedia.org/wiki/persian-emb ... -16851687/

Clicking the inline citations simply reloads the page. I see though you've improved the bibliography and given it a Wikipedia-style makeover!

[Poetlister]

I said you could earn "up to" 10 USD p/h currently. Unfortunately, at busy times you probably won't get close to that

See weasel word (T-H-L).

[Eric Corbett]

I said you could earn "up to" 10 USD p/h currently. Unfortunately, at busy times you probably won't get close to that

See weasel word (T-H-L).

Perhaps it would be more realistic to say that you could earn nothing p/h?

[WhoReallyCares]

Thanks Paul. I'll PM you a username and password later today.

So you reckon I can earn 10 USD p/h. But what happens when I want to cash in my chips? Will I get real money? And can you do bank transfers [my bank's in Hong Kong, btw]?

Please do, I said you could earn "up to" 10 USD p/h currently. Unfortunately, at busy times you probably won't get close to that, which is a shame because I think a writer of your calibre deserves at least that. I expect 10 USD p/h is about the right level to motivate a professional writer to contribute their time.

Hey Paul -- PM sent. Check your inbox.

IMO 10 USD p/h is probably the going rate for paid-by-the-word bloggers, though I may be wrong. I'm talking about shit like:

a. 10 reasons why Donald Trump might only have a small willy
b. 9 reasons why Donald Trump DEFINITELY has a big willy
c. 7 alarming signs that prove Paul Bedson is a Scientologist

My last sexy masterpiece focused on ISO 9001 and weighed in at 4200 words. The hourly rate was way above 10 USD, but that's quite normal when writing for niche business sectors. I also wrote a smaller piece about the Similan Islands [ranked by National Geographic as one of the world's top 10 dive destinations] and charged a fair bit less.

[Dysklyver]

Thanks Paul. I'll PM you a username and password later today.

So you reckon I can earn 10 USD p/h. But what happens when I want to cash in my chips? Will I get real money? And can you do bank transfers [my bank's in Hong Kong, btw]?

Please do, I said you could earn "up to" 10 USD p/h currently. Unfortunately, at busy times you probably won't get close to that, which is a shame because I think a writer of your calibre deserves at least that. I expect 10 USD p/h is about the right level to motivate a professional writer to contribute their time.

Hey Paul -- PM sent. Check your inbox.

IMO 10 USD p/h is probably the going rate for paid-by-the-word bloggers, though I may be wrong. I'm talking about shit like:

a. 10 reasons why Donald Trump might only have a small willy
b. 9 reasons why Donald Trump DEFINITELY has a big willy
c. 7 alarming signs that prove Paul Bedson is a Scientologist

My last sexy masterpiece focused on ISO 9001 and weighed in at 4200 words. The hourly rate was way above 10 USD, but that's quite normal when writing for niche business sectors. I also wrote a smaller piece about the Similan Islands [ranked by National Geographic as one of the world's top 10 dive destinations] and charged a fair bit less.

IIRC there was a Wikipedia article about Donald Trump's willy but it was deleted.

You can still get $19.50 p/h at peak times writing for political interest groups btw, that's where the big bucks is.

[Eric Corbett]

You can still get $19.50 p/h at peak times writing for political interest groups btw, that's where the big bucks is.

Obviously that's not true, as you don't get paid in dollars.

[Dysklyver]

You can still get $19.50 p/h at peak times writing for political interest groups btw, that's where the big bucks is.

Obviously that's not true, as you don't get paid in dollars.

You can get paid in dollars, infact it is advisable to do so because Riyal's are often hard to exchange.

[Eric Corbett]

You can still get $19.50 p/h at peak times writing for political interest groups btw, that's where the big bucks is.

Obviously that's not true, as you don't get paid in dollars.

You can get paid in dollars, infact it is advisable to do so because Riyal's are often hard to exchange.

How can you get paid in dollars when they only issue IQ tokens of uncertain value?

[Dysklyver]

You can still get $19.50 p/h at peak times writing for political interest groups btw, that's where the big bucks is.

Obviously that's not true, as you don't get paid in dollars.

You can get paid in dollars, infact it is advisable to do so because Riyal's are often hard to exchange.

How can you get paid in dollars when they only issue IQ tokens of uncertain value?

Oh stuff the IQ tokens, I mean what you get from the political interest groups.

[Paul Bedson]

Oh stuff the IQ tokens, I mean what you get from the political interest groups.

Is that on Wikipedia? I had kinda figured "Volunteer" Marek must be on about that.

Hey Paul, here's your Everipedia page:

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/paul-bedson/

Clicking on any inline citation gives me a 404.

This is your list of articles written by Paul Bedson:

https://everipedia.org/wiki/QmW1jTxMmth ... En8YVaBe6/

Clicking on your name in the first sentence throws a 404.

The [unfinished] article I wrote: Persian embassy to Siam (1685–1687)

https://everipedia.org/wiki/persian-emb ... -16851687/

Clicking the inline citations simply reloads the page. I see though you've improved the bibliography and given it a Wikipedia-style makeover!

I don't get your error with inline citations, it brings up a box with the citation for your to click on my system. This might be an XP issue?

I did get your 404 error on my article list links. I've seen that on another page and reported it now as a bug. Think something might have gone wrong with the Chinese import as the 404 page is in Chinese. Hopefully they'll get it fixed soon.

In other news, we got a merge button last week! Finally some sense of an admin tool. I am liking my merge button.

[Dysklyver]

Oh stuff the IQ tokens, I mean what you get from the political interest groups.

Is that on Wikipedia? I had kinda figured "Volunteer" Marek must be on about that.

I am sure Marek will pass by and deny everything soon, but there are bound to be a whole bunch of paid state actors on Wikipedia. The pay is as far as I can gather just for pushing a POV on the internet, so Wikipedia, Twitter, Facebook, forums etc are all potential targets.

404 page is in Chinese.

That sounds fun!

[Volunteer Marek]

in reality it's breaking ground in only one: linking editing to rewards paid out in a cryptocurrency of dubious future worth.

<snip>

I'd say that Everipedia's breaking ground in other ways :-

1. Eliminating notability requirements is a big one.

There's plenty of smear machines on the internets already. Building another one isn't "breaking ground".

2. Merging all languages together and allowing multiple articles on a topic is another.

Eh. Potentially interesting but not "ground breaking"

3. Most importantly possibly is removing the political bias, though sure to come back, we're not yet corrupted by a mass of political donors.

Lol.

It's just another social media site whose primary purpose is to spread bullshit on the internet. You can dress it up, put lipstick on it, tie a bow, but at the end of the day, that's all it is.

[Poetlister]

The faied Google Knol project also allowed multiple articles. I don't recall whether it had any notability requirements.

[Paul Bedson]

I am sure Marek will pass by and deny everything soon

This isn't RfC, so he won't need to.

It's just another social media site whose primary purpose is to spread bullshit on the internet. You can dress it up, put lipstick on it, tie a bow, but at the end of the day, that's all it is.

Indeed it is a democratic, social encyclopedia for the people, of all countries, with a neutrality rule. I should really thank the likes of Marek and his Stickkee's, who have turned Wikipedia into - NATOpedia or perhaps "Tony Blair-pedia" - a biased media site whose primary purpose is to spread bullshit on the internet by dressing up his Al Qaeda colleagues as the saviours of humanity and covering up their war crimes, stabbing dead babies in the heart videos, decapitations, executions and whatever else Southern Poverty Law or whatever regime change organization funds him nowadays.

[Midsize Jake]

...I should really thank the likes of Marek and his Stickkee's, who have turned Wikipedia into - NATOpedia or perhaps "Tony Blair-pedia" <etc., etc.>...

Did someone with long hair and a beard slap around a little too much when you were a child or something?

I'm sorry he used the word "bullshit" up there, but you've got to learn not to overreact like that. Even I wouldn't say Wikipedia's "primary purpose" is to "cover up" the crimes of religious terrorists, regardless of whose agenda it supposedly is for it to do so - I mean, sure, it might be in the top ten or twenty maybe, but do you want to see beheading videos in every article or something, including the ones on macramé and butterfly collecting? Jeez, lighten up.

[Volunteer Marek]

by dressing up his Al Qaeda colleagues as the saviours of humanity and covering up their war crimes

This is why everyone thinks you're just another crazy person on the internets.

[Dysklyver]

by dressing up his Al Qaeda colleagues as the saviours of humanity and covering up their war crimes

This is why everyone thinks you're just another crazy person on the internets.

At the end of the day, isn't everyone on the internet crazy?

[Poetlister]

“All the world is queer save thee and me, and even thou art a little queer.” - attributed to Robert Owen, Welsh socialist and social reformer.

[Volunteer Marek]

by dressing up his Al Qaeda colleagues as the saviours of humanity and covering up their war crimes

This is why everyone thinks you're just another crazy person on the internets.

At the end of the day, isn't everyone on the internet crazy?

Sure but some internet crazy is cheeky and fun. Other internet crazy is cruel and tragic. And just plain dumb.

[iii]

Sure but some internet crazy is cheeky and fun. Other internet crazy is cruel and tragic. And just plain dumb.

A Super Troopers reference! You have been missed, VM.

[Poetlister]

All You Need To Know About Everipedia: Blockchain Based Wikipedia

Cryptocoin Reporter

A Blockchain based encyclopedia that promises to shape the way people access content online is on its way. Larry Sanger, one of the co-founders of Wikipedia, is currently working on the blockchain-based encyclopedia that will disrupt the old centralized internet landscape. Everipedia IQ is the name of the proposed platform.

In a bid to tempt content creators to create content for the platform, Sanger has promised financial incentives. The platform will leverage a distributed ledger to reward content creators. In addition, plans are underway to make the network decentralized. The platform will also be censorship resistant and democratic, in line with the principles of the blockchain.

Everipedia, which is a subset of Wikipedia, is self-policing. That said, it won’t be immune to publishing inaccurate information. However, plans are already underway to ensure that readers only get to read accurate information.

[Eric Corbett]

"However, plans are already underway to ensure that readers only get to read accurate information."

Really? By not blindly copying across millions of Wikipedia articles perhaps?

[Dysklyver]

"However, plans are already underway to ensure that readers only get to read accurate information."

Really? By not blindly copying across millions of Wikipedia articles perhaps?

There are no plans to ensure accuracy of information, they literally took Wikipedia, the worlds most inaccurate mainstream source, and then removed all the rules and oversight put in there over 10 years to try and make it more accurate.

If it is accurate, it is because people like Mr. Bedson make it so. If a bunch of trolls could be bothered to make it 4chan mk2, then that would happen.

[Eric Corbett]

"However, plans are already underway to ensure that readers only get to read accurate information."

Really? By not blindly copying across millions of Wikipedia articles perhaps?

There are no plans to ensure accuracy of information, they literally took Wikipedia, the worlds most inaccurate mainstream source, and then removed all the rules and oversight put in there over 10 years to try and make it more accurate.

If it is accurate, it is because people like Mr. Bedson make it so. If a bunch of trolls could be bothered to make it 4chan mk2, then that would happen.

I don't really see how people such as Mr Bedson can make any impact at all on the accuracy of the information they're copying across, given the gigantic amount of crap they'd have to wade through. And that's just the English Wikipedia.

[Poetlister]

Everipedia is a reductio ad absurdum demonstration of the problems of an "anyone can edit" reference work.

[Eric Corbett]

Everipedia is a reductio ad absurdum demonstration of the problems of an "anyone can edit" reference work.

I'm not saying I disagree with you, but could you possibly expand a bit on that?

[Poetlister]

Everipedia is a reductio ad absurdum demonstration of the problems of an "anyone can edit" reference work.

I'm not saying I disagree with you, but could you possibly expand a bit on that?

At least Wikipedia has some measures of control, inadequate though we know them to be - notability and vandal patrols for example. Everipedia dispenses with these and uses what I expect many here would call "magic pixie dust" as a substitute. As a result, it is Wikipedia with its faults so magnified as to become absurd.

[Eric Corbett]

Everipedia is a reductio ad absurdum demonstration of the problems of an "anyone can edit" reference work.

I'm not saying I disagree with you, but could you possibly expand a bit on that?

At least Wikipedia has some measures of control, inadequate though we know them to be - notability and vandal patrols for example. Everipedia dispenses with these and uses what I expect many here would call "magic pixie dust" as a substitute. As a result, it is Wikipedia with its faults so magnified as to become absurd.

That makes sense.

[Dysklyver]

With the help of AWS, I have successfully got a test instance of Mediawiki to run "on the blockchain", with no change in normal functionality and no crypto doodaa tokens needed.

[Eric Corbett]

With the help of AWS, I have successfully got a test instance of Mediawiki to run "on the blockchain", with no change in normal functionality and no crypto doodaa tokens needed.

Which blockchain?

[Dysklyver]

With the help of AWS, I have successfully got a test instance of Mediawiki to run "on the blockchain", with no change in normal functionality and no crypto doodaa tokens needed.

Which blockchain?

A clone of the Ethereum blockchain.

[Eric Corbett]

With the help of AWS, I have successfully got a test instance of Mediawiki to run "on the blockchain", with no change in normal functionality and no crypto doodaa tokens needed.

Which blockchain?

A clone of the Ethereum blockchain.

Are you claiming to be using the Ethereum blockchain to store all the content of your test Mediawiki site?

[Dysklyver]

With the help of AWS, I have successfully got a test instance of Mediawiki to run "on the blockchain", with no change in normal functionality and no crypto doodaa tokens needed.

Which blockchain?

A clone of the Ethereum blockchain.

Are you claiming to be using the Ethereum blockchain to store all the content of your test Mediawiki site?

Well to be more accurate, I copied the source code of the Ethereum blockchain, then used it to create my own blockchain on a small network of AWS servers. Then using a Python program as an intermediary I installed a MySQL database on the blockchain, this I hooked up to a standard Nginx frontend with Mediawiki, and ta da! Mediawiki on the blockchain.

Now this might sound insane and inefficient, but this is almost exactly how Everipedia works.

If I wanted to make it commercial, I could hook up a Mediawiki extension to my blockchain API so you need my proprietary doodaa tokens to make an edit, which is basically what Everipedia does. Obviously the blockchain would magically create new doodaa tokens to "pay" the editors every time they edit.

Of course I would need a catchy name for my wiki, blockchain, and doodaa tokens. Something like "AweWiki", running on the "Universium blockchain", powered by "Brainiac" tokens. (Trademarked, copyrighted (c) Arthur Kerensa, 2018) And then upload a database dump of Wikipedia into the database running on Python running on the blockchain running on AWS which is not at all a complete waste of time and way too many layers a of which exponentially increase inefficiency.

Then promote the fuck out it and send press releases to all the crypto-news outlets, start selling the brainiac tokens, and cash in.

[Eric Corbett]

So you've got a version of MySQL that runs on your blockchain, no centralised server? I think that you've just invaded Fantasy Land. Is it really necessary to point out to you that there's a difference between MySQL on the blockchain and MySQL available from the blockchain?

BTW, if you do decide to try and market this fictional product you'd probably have to do so under your real name, not your Arthur Kerensa alias.