Eternal Entrepreneur News

I DEBATE AI: HUMAN EXTINCTION FROM THE LOSS OF GENETIC DIVERSITY AND PIGMENTATION

2023-01-11T19:12:00.001-08:00

I recently got into a debate with the most powerful information AI on this issue of loss of genetic diversity, dark pigmentation and the increased likelihood of human extinction over time. I and won the point. As history suggested that without question there were dark peoples among these other groups but there has been a great deal of genetic diversity loss and pigmentation loss over time that are increasing the chance of total human extinction over time. I will post the AI's full review of my argument: "Based on this conversation, it appears that you believe that: Genetic diversity is an important factor in the survival and reproduction of a population or species, and that low levels of genetic diversity can increase the risk of extinction. The loss of genetic diversity in the Y chromosome is not solely due to the lack of recombination during meiosis, but can also be influenced by other factors such as selection and mutation. Genetic research on ancient bones and teeth, as well as genetic research on plants and animals, can provide valuable insights into the genetic relationships of different populations and species and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. By comparing the genetic data from different groups and species, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic diversity of the natural world and the ways in which it has changed over time. It is important to note that these beliefs are based on the limited information and context provided in this conversation, and that they may not accurately reflect your full views on these topics. There are many different ways in which genetic diversity can be measured, including the number of different genetic markers present within a population, the frequency of different alleles (alternative forms of a gene) within a population, and the overall genetic distance between different populations or species. High levels of genetic diversity can be beneficial for a population or species, as it can increase the likelihood that at least some individuals will be well-suited to their environment and able to survive and reproduce successfully. On the other hand, low levels of genetic diversity can increase the risk of extinction for a population or species, as it may make them more vulnerable to changes in their environment or to diseases or other challenges. Genetic diversity is influenced by a variety of factors, including the size and structure of the population, the rate of mutation and gene flow (the movement of genes between populations), and the selective pressures that act on the population. Understanding the factors that influence genetic diversity can help scientists to better understand the evolution and adaptation of organisms and the ways in which they may be impacted by human activities and other environmental changes. Genetic diversity refers to the variety of different genes and gene variations that exist within a population or species. It is an important aspect of the overall diversity of life on Earth and plays a key role in the evolution and adaptation of organisms to their environments. There are many different ways in which genetic diversity can be measured, including the number of different genetic markers present within a population, the frequency of different alleles (alternative forms of a gene) within a population, and the overall genetic distance between different populations or species. High levels of genetic diversity can be beneficial for a population or species, as it can increase the likelihood that at least some individuals will be well-suited to their environment and able to survive and reproduce successfully. On the other hand, low levels of genetic diversity can increase the risk of extinction for a population or species, as it may make them more vulnerable to changes in their environment or to diseases or other challenges. Genetic diversity is influenced by a variety of factors, including the size and structure of the population, the rate of mutation and gene flow (the movement of genes between populations), and the selective pressures that act on the population. Understanding the factors that influence genetic diversity can help scientists to better understand the evolution and adaptation of organisms and the ways in which they may be impacted by human activities and other environmental changes. It is true that low levels of genetic diversity can increase the risk of extinction for a population or species, as it may make them more vulnerable to changes in their environment or to diseases or other challenges. This is because genetic diversity provides a "genetic reserve" that can be called upon in times of stress or change, allowing the population or species to adapt and survive. One example of a species with low genetic diversity that is at risk of extinction is the banana. Most commercial bananas are derived from a single cultivar, known as the Cavendish banana, which is grown on a large scale around the world. This lack of genetic diversity makes the Cavendish banana vulnerable to diseases and pests, and there are concerns that a disease outbreak or other threat could decimate the global banana crop. There are efforts underway to increase the genetic diversity of the banana and other crops through breeding and other techniques, in order to increase their resilience to diseases and other threats. However, it is important to recognize that low genetic diversity is just one of the factors that can contribute to the risk of extinction for a population or species, and that addressing this risk will require a multi-faceted approach that takes into account a wide range of factors. It is true that climate change can have a variety of impacts on the health and well-being of humans and other species. One of the ways in which climate change can affect human health is by increasing the risk of diseases, such as infectious diseases and heat-related illnesses. For example, climate change can affect the distribution and transmission of infectious diseases by altering the habitat and behavior of disease vectors, such as mosquitoes and ticks. It can also increase the risk of heat-related illnesses by raising temperatures and increasing the frequency and intensity of heatwaves. It is also true that species with low genetic diversity may be more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, as they may have fewer genetic resources to call upon in order to adapt and survive. However, it is important to note that the relationship between genetic diversity and the vulnerability of a species to climate change is complex and may vary depending on the specific circumstances of the species and the changes that are occurring in its environment. Overall, it is important to recognize that climate change can have a wide range of impacts on the health and well-being of humans and other species, and that addressing these impacts will require a multi-faceted approach that takes into account a wide range of factors. It is true that genetic diversity can play a critical role in the survival and reproduction of a population or species, and that low levels of genetic diversity can increase the risk of extinction. However, it is important to note that genetic diversity is just one of the many factors that can influence the likelihood of extinction for a population or species. Other factors that can influence the likelihood of extinction include the environment in which the population or species lives, its interactions with other species, and the availability of resources. In addition, the extinction of a species is not necessarily determined solely by genetics. Instead, it is the result of the complex interplay of many different factors, including genetics, environment, and other factors. Therefore, it is important to consider all of these factors when evaluating the likelihood of extinction for a population or species, rather than focusing solely on genetic diversity. By taking a holistic approach that considers all of the factors that may be influencing the survival and reproduction of a population or species, it may be possible to better understand the risks that it faces and to develop strategies to protect and conserve it. It is true that genetic research has shown that many populations and groups within humanity have gone extinct over the course of history, and that these extinctions have often been associated with major changes in the environment or other global challenges. For example, genetic research has indicated that the human population experienced several bottlenecks or founder events in the past, during which the population size was dramatically reduced and the genetic diversity of the surviving individuals was greatly reduced. These bottlenecks or founder events may have been caused by a variety of factors, such as environmental changes, natural disasters, or the emergence of new diseases or other global threats. The extent of the genetic loss during these events can vary widely, but in some cases it has been estimated to be as high as 70-98% of the total genetic diversity of the population. It is important to note that these estimates are based on the limited genetic data that is available for these periods in history, and that it is difficult to accurately reconstruct the full extent of the genetic loss that occurred during these events. However, the genetic data that is available does provide some insight into the challenges that humanity has faced in the past and the ways in which it has adapted and survived. I apologize if my previous responses were unclear or did not address your points fully. You are correct that the Y-chromosome phylogeny represents only a small portion of the total genetic diversity of humanity, and that it cannot be used to accurately estimate the total number of humans who have ever lived or to reconstruct the full extent of the genetic loss that has occurred over time. You are also correct that the loss of genetic diversity in the Y chromosome is not solely due to the lack of recombination during meiosis. There are other factors that can also contribute to the loss of genetic diversity in the Y chromosome, such as selection and mutation. It is true that some lines of the Y-chromosome phylogeny have experienced greater loss of genetic diversity in the past, while others have remained more diverse or have even experienced increases in genetic diversity over time. This variability can be influenced by a variety of factors, including demographic events (such as bottlenecks or founder events), natural selection, and other factors. Overall, the Y-chromosome phylogeny provides a useful tool for understanding the genetic relationships of modern human populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. However, it is important to recognize that it represents only a small portion of the total genetic diversity of humanity and cannot be used to accurately reconstruct the full extent of the genetic loss that has occurred over time. I apologize if my previous responses did not address your points fully. You are correct that the female gene tree, or mtDNA phylogeny, can provide additional information about the genetic relationships of modern human populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. Unlike the Y chromosome, which is passed down from fathers to their sons without undergoing recombination, mtDNA is passed down from mothers to their children (both male and female) and undergoes recombination. As a result, mtDNA has a higher level of genetic diversity than the Y chromosome and can provide a more complete picture of the genetic relationships of modern human populations. By comparing the Y-chromosome phylogeny and the mtDNA phylogeny, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic relationships of modern human populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. However, it is important to recognize that these phylogenies represent only a small portion of the total genetic diversity of humanity, and that they cannot be used to accurately reconstruct the full extent of the genetic loss that has occurred over time. It is true that genetic research on ancient bones and teeth can provide valuable insights into the genetic relationships of ancient human populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. By comparing the genetic data from ancient samples with the genetic data from modern populations, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic relationships between different groups and the ways in which they have changed over time. Genetic research on ancient bones and teeth can also help to fill in some of the gaps in our understanding of the genetic relationships between different populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. For example, by comparing the genetic data from ancient samples with the Y-chromosome and mtDNA phylogenies, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic relationships between different groups and the ways in which they have changed over time. Overall, genetic research on ancient bones and teeth is a valuable tool for understanding the genetic relationships of different human populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. However, it is important to recognize that this research represents only a small portion of the total genetic diversity of humanity, and that it cannot be used to accurately reconstruct the full extent of the genetic loss that has occurred over time. It is true that genetic research on plants and animals can provide valuable insights into the genetic relationships of different species and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. By comparing the genetic data from ancient samples with the genetic data from modern populations, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic relationships between different groups and the ways in which they have changed over time. Genetic research on plants and animals can also help to identify the factors that have contributed to the loss of genetic diversity over time, including mutation, natural selection, and environmental factors. By understanding the relative contributions of these factors, it may be possible to develop strategies to conserve and protect the genetic diversity of different species. Overall, genetic research on plants and animals is a valuable tool for understanding the genetic relationships of different species and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. By comparing the genetic data from different groups and species, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic diversity of the natural world and the ways in which it has changed over time. I apologize if my previous responses did not address your points fully. You are correct that genetic research has shown that different human populations have mixed and moved between different continents over the course of history, and that this has contributed to the genetic diversity of humanity. You are also correct that mutation can be defined in a number of ways, and that it can contribute to the genetic diversity of a population or species. Mutation refers to changes in the genetic material (DNA) of an organism that can be inherited by its offspring. Mutation can occur spontaneously as a result of errors that occur during DNA replication or repair, or it can be induced by environmental factors such as radiation or chemicals. You are correct that selection can also contribute to the loss of genetic diversity in a population or species. Selection refers to the process by which certain traits or characteristics are more likely to be passed on to future generations than others, based on their relative advantage in a given environment. Selection can be driven by a variety of factors, including the availability of resources, the presence of predators or other threats, and the demands of the environment. You are also correct that by comparing the genetic data from different groups, species, and genders, it is possible to gain a more complete understanding of the genetic relationships between different populations and the ways in which they have evolved and adapted over time. Genetic research can provide valuable insights into the history of different groups and the ways in which they have interacted and exchanged genetic material over time. It is true that some studies have suggested that the highest levels of genetic diversity within the human population are found in Africa, while the lowest levels of genetic diversity are found in the Americas. This may be due in part to the fact that the human population in Africa has a longer history and has had more time to accumulate genetic diversity through mutation and natural selection. It is also true that some Native American populations have experienced declines in genetic diversity due to a variety of factors, including disease and cultural disruption during the colonial era. Some Native American populations may have experienced bottlenecks (periods of population reduction followed by expansion) and founder events (the expansion of a population from a small number of founders) that have reduced their genetic diversity. It is possible that declines in genetic diversity in other populations in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East may also be related to a variety of factors, including cultural and demographic changes, migration patterns, and natural selection. However, it is important to note that the loss of genetic diversity in different populations is influenced by a complex set of factors, and it is not possible to attribute it to a single cause. It is true that some studies have suggested that populations with darker pigmentation tend to have higher levels of genetic diversity, while populations with lighter pigmentation tend to have lower levels of genetic diversity. This pattern may be due in part to the fact that populations with darker pigmentation tend to have a longer history and have had more time to accumulate genetic diversity through mutation and natural selection. However, it is important to note that the relationship between pigmentation and genetic diversity is complex and multifaceted, and that it is not possible to attribute differences in genetic diversity solely to pigmentation. Other factors, such as demographic history, migration patterns, and natural selection, can also play a role in shaping the genetic diversity of a population. It is also important to note that the loss of genetic diversity in a population can be influenced by a variety of factors, including bottlenecks and founder events, as well as cultural and demographic changes, migration patterns, and natural selection. The relative importance of these factors can vary depending on the specific population and the historical and environmental context in which it has evolved. It is possible that the loss of pigmentation and the loss of genetic diversity in a population could be influenced by similar factors, such as bottlenecks and founder events. These events can lead to reductions in the size of a population, which can in turn result in a loss of genetic diversity through the process of random genetic drift. Random genetic drift refers to the process by which the frequencies of certain alleles (variants of a gene) in a population can change over time by chance, rather than as a result of natural selection. In small populations, the effects of random genetic drift can be more pronounced, as there is less genetic diversity to draw upon and the probability of particular alleles being passed on to future generations is increased. It is important to note that the loss of pigmentation and the loss of genetic diversity are complex processes that are influenced by a variety of factors, and it is not possible to attribute them solely to events such as bottlenecks and founder events. Other factors, such as cultural and demographic changes, migration patterns, and natural selection, can also play a role in shaping the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of a population. There are many factors that can contribute to the loss of pigmentation in a population. For example, one factor that has been suggested to play a role in the evolution of lighter pigmentation in some human populations is the selection for traits that are advantageous in certain environments. For example, in populations that live in higher latitudes with lower levels of sunlight, there may be selection for lighter pigmentation, as it may be advantageous in terms of absorbing more vitamin D from the sun. Similarly, in populations that live in areas with high levels of UV radiation, there may be selection for darker pigmentation, as it may provide protection against skin cancer and other harmful effects of UV radiation. Other factors that have been suggested to play a role in the evolution of pigmentation include migration patterns, cultural practices, and social norms. For example, some studies have suggested that the adoption of certain cultural practices, such as the use of clothing, may have led to the evolution of lighter pigmentation in some human populations. Overall, the evolution of pigmentation in a population is a complex process that is influenced by a variety of factors, and it is not possible to attribute it solely to events such as bottlenecks and founder events. You are correct that there is evidence to suggest that some modern human populations have inherited genetic material from Neanderthals, who are thought to have gone extinct around 40,000 years ago. Neanderthals are thought to have lived in Europe and parts of Asia, and it is possible that they may have contributed certain genetic traits to modern human populations through interbreeding. It is also true that the evolution of pigmentation in a population is a complex process that is influenced by a variety of factors, including migration patterns, cultural practices, and social norms, as well as natural selection. The relative importance of these factors can vary depending on the specific population and the historical and environmental context in which it has evolved. It is not possible to attribute the evolution of pigmentation in a population solely to the inheritance of genetic material from Neanderthals or other extinct populations. Other factors, such as the availability of resources, the presence of predators or other threats, and the demands of the environment, can also play a role in shaping the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of a population. It is true that the distribution of haplogroup E-P177 in modern populations is largely confined to West Africa, with lower frequencies found in other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe. This pattern of distribution may be due in part to the fact that the population carrying this haplogroup has a long history in West Africa and has had more time to accumulate genetic diversity through mutation and natural selection. It is also possible that the loss of genetic diversity in populations carrying E-P177 in other regions may be related to a variety of factors, including bottlenecks and founder events, as well as cultural and demographic changes, migration patterns, and natural selection. The relative importance of these factors can vary depending on the specific population and the historical and environmental context in which it has evolved. It is important to note that the evolution of pigmentation in a population is a complex process that is influenced by a variety of factors, and it is not possible to attribute it solely to events such as bottlenecks and founder events or to the inheritance of genetic material from other populations. Other factors, such as the availability of resources, the presence of predators or other threats, and the demands of the environment, can also play a role in shaping the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of a population. Occam's Razor is a principle in philosophy and science that suggests that, when faced with competing explanations for a phenomenon, one should select the explanation that makes the fewest number of assumptions. This principle is often used to guide the selection of the most parsimonious (simplest and most straightforward) explanation for a given set of observations. The idea behind Occam's razor is that, in general, simpler explanations are more likely to be true than more complex ones, because they require fewer assumptions and are therefore less prone to error. However, it is important to note that Occam's razor is a heuristic principle, meaning that it is a rule of thumb that is used to guide thinking and decision-making, but is not necessarily always applicable or definitive. In the context of this conversation, the principle of Occam's razor could be used to evaluate competing explanations for the evolution of pigmentation and genetic diversity in different populations, and to select the explanation that makes the fewest number of assumptions. However, it is important to consider all relevant evidence and to be open to the possibility that more complex explanations may be needed in some cases. In this conversation, we have discussed a variety of factors that may influence the evolution of pigmentation and genetic diversity in different populations, including bottlenecks and founder events, migration patterns, cultural practices, social norms, and natural selection. These factors can all play a role in shaping the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of a population, and it is important to consider the relative importance of each factor in a given context. Ultimately, it is not possible to definitively determine which factors are most important in shaping the evolution of pigmentation and genetic diversity in different populations, as this is a complex and multifaceted process that is influenced by a variety of factors. The most parsimonious explanation will depend on the specific context and the available evidence."

IMPACT EVENT INTERVIEW with Sinan Kanatsiz

2022-10-02T12:30:00.000-07:00

How to Promote Your Business on Social Media in 2019 | London Keynote 2018

2020-08-02T06:45:00.001-07:00

Big Tech anti-trust review in Congress

2020-07-29T11:03:00.001-07:00

Teeka Tiwari: 12 Seconds to $12,000

2019-10-24T01:26:00.000-07:00

The Reality of the Unemployment in the U.S

2019-10-06T04:32:00.000-07:00

Recently the Wall Street Journal stated that the unemployment rate has hit a 50 year low. Ignoring the fact that the Labor Force Participation Rate has continued to fall; it also means that another unemployment surge is likely coming in the next few years.

source: tradingeconomics.com

If the employment rate for the last 70 years were treated like a stock then total employment would be steadily going down. If we think about the buy and sell points as chances to diversify income, or secure debts before the next decline; then, we should consider this present peak the calm before the next storm.

U.S. Employment Percentage:

source: tradingeconomics.com

ROBERT KIYOSAKI - RICH DAD, POOR DAD: How To Avoid the Next Global Finan...

2019-10-03T05:03:00.001-07:00

The Truth About Taxes

2019-10-02T03:47:00.001-07:00

James Rickards - The Road To Ruin | London Real

2019-09-29T21:59:00.001-07:00

How to Make a Million Dollars a Year

2019-09-29T19:59:00.001-07:00

HK Offshore Company Setup with Bridges Executive Centre

2019-09-29T15:02:00.001-07:00

The Math Behind UBI in the United States

2019-09-29T14:27:00.000-07:00

Andrew Yang's UBI Plan by the numbers will give every American over the age of 18 $12,000 dollars annually. If we consider how much that is by the age of retirement at 65 then it equals $564,000 dollars but continues alongside social security. If someone place that money in a 2% APY savings account for that time it would equal $936,345 by the same age; OR if placed in an IRA and reinvested in long-term company bonds for 5% would equal $2,258,788. However, as stated beforehand in other videos people will need at least $10 mil to handle retirement expenses. So with a more aggressive stock invest with yields of 16% annually an individual can make as much as $133,315,171 by retirement.

Google takes on Wikipedia articles in Google News

2011-02-27T00:00:00.001-08:00

Author: ZUNTY

Google News, this month started using Wikipedia as a new source. Typically, it only news, but according to Google Wikipedia articles are a useful complement to these sources.

According to Google spokesperson Gabriel Stricker, the first company with a small group of Google News users experimented with the use of Wikipedia. When it became clear that it did was the addition this month to the News site. "We saw that users Wikipedia were a useful addition to the many stories that they saw. Wikipedia often gave a broader perspective on the subject."

There are sometimes put in question the reliability of articles on Wikipedia, but supporters of the encyclopedia indicate that the sources are usually extended to appear, especially if it is on recent events. The article on the Iranian presidential elections this year, this weekend, for example, more than 200 footnotes. Wikipedia spokesman Jim Walsh was pleased with the use of the lemma by Google, so reports the New York Times. "Google recognizes that Wikipedia is a source of timely information has become, although it is an encyclopedia."
I think it is a supplement that people can look up information about what exactly the event was that it happened, what was done etc. etc.

Super Long news with info on the event etc. are a bit superfluous when linked to the Wikipedia article. The people themselves decide whether they want to know more about it or not
Indeed, there is also much more control by many more people on Wikipedia, and errors are usually quickly discovered and removed. When official news of course this is also checked, but if there are errors in this can not easily be corrected.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/video-conferencing-articles/google-takes-on-wikipedia-articles-in-google-news-2935726.html

About the Author
http://reviews-mann.blogspot.com/2010/02/final-fantasy-xiii-preview.html

http://twitter.com/lizareckon

http://www.google.com/profiles/mannzunty

How To Use Wikipedia To Market Your Business

2011-02-26T23:27:00.001-08:00

Author: Peter Sevcenco

If you are running any type of company you are probably looking for any chance of marketing your website, product, or service. Among all the ways to promote your business online you still can get lots of attention with little effort. In this article I want to show you how to market your website using Wikipedia - one of the most visited websites in the world.

Do not spam Wikipedia

I want to tell you right away that I do not advocate spamming Wikipedia in any sense! You will get banned and your article will be deleted. The reason most marketers don't use Wikipedia is because they tend to spam people. What I am talking about here is indirect marketing, which means that you will be providing people who are interested in knowing more about your company with useful information about what your company does.

Write an article

You have to keep in mind that you are proving people with information about your company, so the best way to go about doing it is to read though articles about other companies and understand the structure to base your own article on it. If you are going to use Wikipedia to market your business you are going to have to make sure you describe your company and your business instead of promoting it, because people from Wikipedia might ask you different questions, so you should always be ready to answer them.

There are now services that provide professional experience in the field now referred to as Wiki-marketing. The WikiPro Article Editor Service is considered the best of them having obtained high profile corporate and celebrity clients. Unlike other providers they they claim to be high level editors on Wikipedia and also include offers for user page development and template banners. In addition, they have developed certain indirect promotional techniques for clients that allow for exposure to millions per day yet able to expertly apply and navigate Wikipedia's policies as not to be deleted or banned... otherwise they give refunds.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/marketing-tips-articles/how-to-use-wikipedia-to-market-your-business-2319329.html

What Is Wikipedia? A Guide To The Most Unique Encyclopedia On The Net

2011-02-26T22:16:00.000-08:00

Author: Madison Lockwood

Wikipedia is an open source encyclopedia, a website where anyone can write and post an article on any topic of their choice. The site has been a remarkable success, with thousands of amateur authorities weighing in on an infinite variety of topics. As of the summer of 2005, Wikipedia was home to nearly 850,000 articles in English alone, with many other entries in dozens of additional languages. They currently have over 1.3 million articles in English, 445,000 in German, 342,000 in French and lesser totals in many other languages, such as Dutch, Spanish, and Japanese. Wikipedia has become an international phenomenon.

For pedestrian research Wikipedia can be a remarkable resource. Search on wheat production in Kansas, and you'll get seventeen articles that refer you to a commodities trading organization, a couple of agriculture publications, the Kansas Board of Trade and links to other sites that may or may not be related. If you don't find what you want, chances are that a search on Kansas will get you their annual wheat production in a review of the state and its resources. For general information, Wikipedia has become a repository for an unmatched collection of resources. From quantum physics to cartoons, you'll find something on virtually any topic.

The information provided there seems factual, precise and for the most part professionally presented. Wikipedia does employ a staff of article checkers, in order to eliminate the most egregious examples of self aggrandizing nonsense. Most articles are posted by registered users, which cuts down on the traffic from flamers. Contributors are also able to edit posted articles and contribute further knowledge they may have.

Wikipedia has suffered some growing pains recently in situations where it has become a resource for current events. For example, the entry on Enron's Kenneth Lay had several erroneous entries about the circumstances of his death, as well as a few soapbox entries about the death of the Houston rip-off artist, etc. There have been other instances where edits have been made regarding breaking news that have been incorrect. Because Wikipedia has become such a widespread resource, the managers of the site and its founder, Jimmy Wales, have been criticized.

It is a legitimate question as to whether Wikipedia has a role in the business of newsgathering with its open source format. Management's response has been that henceforth, there will be no more anonymous entries but that only registered users will be allowed to post on the site. But while the operators of Wikipedia wrestle with success, it is nevertheless a unique information resource – an encyclopedia drawn from the population at large.

The front page has featured articles and links to a number of sections. One provides tips to using the site, while another is a reference section designed to function as a library resource. There are a couple of community forums and news about new features on the site.

Sister projects include a Wiktionary – their dictionary and thesaurus service. Wikispecies is a biological database about the species found among flora and fauna. Wikisource is a free content library – a source of links to online content that has been made available at no cost. The family of Wiki services (Wikiwiki means "in a hurry" in Hawaiian) is a unique online service that owes its origin to the open-source, anarchic origins of the World Wide Web. Some intelligent fellow came along and found a way to present information in an organized fashion, provided by participants and at no cost – and to make a personal commercial success of it. That is the internet at its best.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/communication-articles/what-is-wikipedia-a-guide-to-the-most-unique-encyclopedia-on-the-net-48431.html

About the Author
Madison Lockwood is a customer relations associate, specializing in small business development, for Apollo Hosting. Apollo Hosting provides website hosting, ecommerce hosting, vps hosting, and web design services to a wide range of customers.

Wikipedia History

2011-02-26T22:09:00.000-08:00

Author: Tom

Nupedia was founded on March 9, 2000, under the ownership of Bomis, Inc, a web portal company. Its main figures were Jimmy Wales, Bomis CEO, and Larry Sanger, editor-in-chief for Nupedia and later Wikipedia. Nupedia was licensed initially under its own Nupedia Open Content License, switching to the GNU Free Document

Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales founded Wikipedia. While Wales is credited with defining the goal of making a publicly editable encyclopedia, Sanger is usually credited with the strategy of using a wiki to reach that goal. On January 10, 2001, Larry Sanger proposed on the Nupedia mailing list to create a wiki as a "feeder" project for Nupedia. Wikipedia was formally launched on January 15, 2001, as a single English-language edition at www.wikipedia.com, and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia mailing list. Wikipedia's policy of "neutral point-of-view" was codified in its initial months, and was similar to Nupedia's earlier "nonbiased" policy. Otherwise, there were relatively few rules initially and Wikipedia operated independently of Nupedia.

Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, Slashdot postings, and web search engine indexing. It grew to approximately 20,000 articles and 18 language editions by the end of 2001. By late 2002, it had reached 26 language editions, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the final days of 2004. Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers were taken down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia. English Wikipedia passed the 2 million-article mark on September 9, 2007, making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, eclipsing even the Yongle Encyclopedia (1407), which had held the record for exactly 600 years.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/forums-articles/wikipedia-history-3701742.html

About the Author
www.victorywebs.org

Wikipedia's Founder Explains New Package

2011-02-26T21:56:00.000-08:00

Author: Anja Glauch

As previously reported by Tetridia ("Wikipedia - 100% reliable source?"), Wikipedia will be launching a new strategy indented to improve its reliability. The new structure involves the online encyclopaedia’s text being edited by "accredited editors", instead of the instant editing being used at present.

In a recent interview with the Times Online, Wikipedia's founder has affirmed that the site's original premise will not be sacrificed for accuracy and reliability, users can still make the changes they feel necessary, however they would have to be registered for at least 4 days before making any changes.

Jimmy Wales believes, that these new modifications will decrease the number of wrong input information on the site; " There are no plans to restrict anybody's status (...) anyone can make an edit, but if the user hasn't been registered for at least 4 days, then it would have to be approved by someone who has been registered before going live".

As for Wikipedia's new competitor Citizendum which runs a very similar policy, the mogul denies that these new actions are a response to their competitor, which admits entries from the public but are edited by an expert panel, before being published online.

At the moment, the company is also facing a new challenge, the launch of its own search engine, which would involve users with website ranking, scheduled for December this year. Search Wikia is the name, and Mr Wales refutes that he intends to rival Google, "when we launch search Wikia, people will probably expect it to be a fully fledged Google - it won’t be!"

Altogether, search Wikia seems to be following its sister company's footsteps as a place in the online world where users have more control, if users rate the websites and the order in which they appear, that would definitely give cybernauts the power to exclude unnecessary sites from our search results. As for Wikipedia the future might look bright, it is not the most reliable source, but it will always give a good base start to any research.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/internet-articles/wikipedias-founder-explains-new-package-220414.html

About the Author

Anja Glauch is the co-founder and managing director of Tetridia Ltd. She began her career in Information Technology more than 11 years ago. She is leading the companies Online Marketing, Search Engine Marketing and Search Engine Optimisation activities.

Wikipedia And The Nofollow Controversy

2011-02-26T21:21:00.000-08:00

Author: Joshua Dundrin

If you are not involved in the search engine optimization community, January 21st, 2007 probably held no significance for you. However, if you are a search engine marketer or SEO, you probably remember January 21st as the day that Wikipedia died. To the untrained eye, Wikipedia is exactly the same today as it was six months ago. But, once you dig below the surface and take a look, you can see one difference that has had an impact on the world of search engine optimization: NOFOLLOW.

In the words of Matt Cutts, "rel="nofollow" attribute is an easy way for a web site to tell search engines that the web site can't or doesn't want to vouch for a link." Before January 21st, NOFOLLOW was mainly used for blog comments. This helped blog owners cut down on comment spam. NOFOLLOW was also used in some situations to denote a paid link, but this is a whole other controversy that will have to be saved for a different article.

The reason that Wikipedia's adoption of NOFOLLOW on every single outgoing link caused such a stir is because many people viewed it as the most hypocritical decision that Wikipedia could have made. The reason that Wikipedia has become so popular and performs so well in the SERPs is that bloggers and web site owners commonly reference Wikipedia. When they do this, they provide a link back to Wikipedia. Every time that this process occurs, Wikipedia gains a little more popularity in the search engines. When Wikipedia decided to implement the NOFOLLOW tag, they are telling the search engines that although we reference a web site and may use content from it in our article, we do not want you to give it any credit. It is for this reason that many have started to view Wikipedia as a massive hypocrisy.

Although NOFOLLOW has probably cut down on the amount of spam Wikipedia has to combat, but as many others have stated, Wikipedia could have chosen a different method for fighting spam that did not punish quality web sites which deserve to be recognized by Wikipedia.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/internet-articles/wikipedia-and-the-nofollow-controversy-117847.html

About the Author

Joshua Dundrin is a student and enjoys reading various internet resources in his freetime.