Skip to main content

Home/ Net 308/508 Internet Collaboration and Organisation S1 2012/ Group items tagged BitTorrent

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
owen_davies

BitTorrents and Family Guy: teenage peer group interactions around a peer-to-peer Inter... - 22 views

This particular paper looks into the bit torrent community while focusing on the popular American Cartoon-Comedy Family Guy. The article looks into how bit torrent is able to make downloading and s...

Net308_508 Crowd bittorrent

started by Chin Sing Wong on 25 Mar 12 3 follow-ups, last by owen_davies on 10 Apr 12
michelangelo magasic

STEAL THIS FILM - 2 views

www.stealthisfilm.com/Part1

Net308_508 BitTorrent creativity ideological struggle solidarity

shared by michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12 - Cached
  • michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12
     
    Steal this Film is a documentary about bittorrent culture centred around the story of the Swedish torrent tracking website The Pirate Bay. In telling their story, the Pirate Bay members relate quite early on that they are not only a filesharing website but also an organisation for free speech. We see bittorrent organisations as situated within the wider context of media piracy and filesharing networks as clandestine organisations that must be diffuse in order to evade detection by anti p2p groups. The Pirate Bay's struggle against media outlets is elevated to a battle against American cultural hegemony. Within this context Kent's (2011) reading of the swarm as a simulacra of group identity can be seen as a defence - a tactic - as deCerteau (1984) puts it for the weak to re-appropriate the power of the strong. Filesharing is a form of protest. By publicising their struggle, The Pirate Bay build a bridge between physical and virtual communities. The film features spontaneous interviews with people on the street."The internet is too big, you can't fight it, (27mins)" says a girl with blue hair. Is she referring to the network of computers which make up the internet, or the strength of communities which practice filesharing, the linkages and solidarity of people across the world? This footage awakens the reader's conceptions of a link between physical and virtual activities, online collaboration breeds a solidarity between users which can echo beyond the activities of the swarm. We see bittorrent used not solely as a method for obtaining entertainment but as a vehicle for ideological struggle. The faces in the movie are conspicuously youthful and one sees that they collaborate not only in terms of files but also in ideas and viewpoints. We see bittorrent as a tool for worldwide collaboration/change. References Certeau, M. (1984), The Practice of Everyday Life. University of California Press, Berkeley. Kent M (2011), 'Strangers in the Sw
  • ...3 more comments...
  • samara hartnett on 07 Apr 12
     
    There is no escaping the debate about copyright when studying the Internet. This however is refreshing point of few surrounding the topic. The reliability of the source is sound as long as a viewer is wary of any bias as it is solely from the Pirate Bay point of view. There is a strong representation of a youth culture also. The youth appear tired of being force fed the institutionalized approach to media that had previously existed. As the interviewees comment, the raid on Pirate Bay was clearly a political power play and one that backfired. There is defiance towards America in particular as the documentary presents evidence of its attempt to pressure Sweden into sabotaging those who are 'threatening' Hollywood industries. Copyright laws do not translate across international boarders and for the first time, thanks to this documentary, I could actually see how this might play out in the real world. This is both valuable and useful in the overall understanding of the Bit torrent topic. Of particular importance to me was the statement made by one of the Piratbyran creators, Rasmus Fleischer, stated that they are 'our basic principle is not about building empires' (The League of Noble Peers, 2006). This is the most crucial difference between the Hollywood approach to copyright and the P2P approach to copyright. Just because media is made available for free consumption does not mean that it will not translate into sales on any level. I went away from this documentary feeling that industry producers and distributors need to get creative with their content, listen to their consumers and create a shared experience of shared benefit to both sides of the argument.
  • Paul Francis on 08 Apr 12
     
    This roughly thirty minute long documentary, while being a very "copy-left" focussed, helps to place BitTorrent within the context of global politics. It is about "ThePirateBay", one of the biggest BitTorrent trackers in history. ThePirateBay's servers are physically located in Sweden, and this documentary shows how Swedish law has interacted with American and international laws about copyright and file sharing. It uses various clips from many different interviews, including the people central to ThePirateBay but also Swedish citizens seemingly randomly interviewed on the street. It is interesting to note that many of them do seem to have some knowledge about ThePirateBay and also express their support for the site. This sense of community surrounding BitTorrent reminds me of the Australian youths in the "BitTorrents and Family Guy: teenage peer group interactions around a peer-to-peer Internet download community" paper. This documentary highlights the feeling of oppression and resistance to control of media which seems to underlie the communities who use BitTorrent. Combined with the copyright laws, these are worth thinking about because of how they influence the way people use BitTorrent to collaborate, and also how people collaborate to support file-sharing, including by demonstration as seen in the documentary.
  • theresia sandjaja on 09 Apr 12
     
    This film provides various aspects of online file sharing, particularly, in relation to music and movies. The topics discussed in the film include: the difference in copyright laws between America and Sweden, how online file sharing changed the nature of networking within society. The film also presented the contrast of perspectives of online file sharing held by younger consumers as opposed to those of the older producers. In America, major music and film industries regard peer-to-peer file sharing as an infringement to copyright, while in Sweden there is no copyright law for film and music productions that are available in bittorent. A Swedish user disputed that American copyright law should not intervene in other countries because there is no geographical limitation in the Internet. The age gap also highlighted different perspectives, for example, younger users believe in the right to public access while the older producers believe in that commodities (such as music and films) cannot be given to people for free. To argue this, the market of music and film industry cannot outlaw social change. Lastly, the activity of file sharing through bittorent has changed how the way society collaborates to exchange ideas and information. For example, the support to use bittorent is not documented in a fixed website but only transferred through online forums where users collaborate as social groups. This film relates well to the resources I had about Youtube in terms of different perspective based on age. Young people tend to use online media fluently and do not see copyright implications. The movements towards file sharing has become even more apparent, this is shown by social online collaboration is the current method to consume popular media, how the consumer recreate this media and contribute to the mass again.
  • owen_davies on 10 Apr 12
     
    Steal this Film, is a short 30-minute documentary that looks at the social politics and debate about file sharing and the bit torrent client, focusing on Swedish torrent tracking website The Pirate Bay. The documentary outlines how file sharing and copyright is a touchy subject within American laws, and through the documentary we are able to hear differing opinions on who is right and who wrong. The various people that are interviewed who are involved with the Pirate Bay take a 'us against the world' approach and make it clear that technically they aren't doing anything wrong, and through the power of free speech they are making their voice heard. Numerous youths are also interviewed and each seem to be of the copyleft opinion that what they are doing is almost some sort of activism, and believe that these torrent communities are un-able to be stopped. I would also have to agree with this as a 'Pirate' myself and also through the learning that I have undertaken while at university, that this excuse by the Movie/Music industry that they aren't being hurt through piracy is totally utterly false and I think as one of the speakers in the video says "We aren't going to wake up one day and find that all music artists have died because of Piracy". In fact I would go as far to say that because of this cry-baby outlook by these industries that the bit torrent and file-sharing communities have been strengthened because of it.
  • jessica_mann on 11 Apr 12
     
    I was taken aback when I went to download 'Steal This Film' and it popped up as a torrent file in BitTorrent. I suppose I wasn't used to, what I perceived as, 'legitimate' content being provided in the form of a torrent. The film stated, "right now ten million people are using BitTorrent" and indeed, at the time of watching, I was also using BitTorrent. One of the things I found admirable, and also a little surprising, was the resilience of the Pirate Bay founders. Even after being raided and shut down by the authorities, their belief in what they were doing, and their advocacy of free speech, was too strong to just let go. I also found the film interesting in its depiction of the various anti piracy campaigns created by Hollywood film studios juxtaposed with the interviews of young people claiming that the amount of money made by Hollywood is "absurd". Even if crew members and writers are suffering at the hands of film piracy, like the people interviewed, I find it difficult to sympathise with Hollywood's view point when you can safely assume that the largest chunk of proceeds made from any film go to the 'talent' and not those people working so hard behind the scenes. Perhaps Hollywood losing money could be considered a positive outcome, as so many subpar films probably should never have been made in the first place. Perhaps having less money to fund any film on a whim will lead film studios to choose their projects more carefully, resulting in the delivery of quality rather than quantity to film consumers.
michelangelo magasic

Idea Bank - One should be able to say thanks to peers after torrent download by a tiny ... - 2 views

www.bittorrent.com/...ideabank

Net308_508 BitTorrent community user shaped

shared by michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12
     
    This is a page from BitTorrent.com's Idea Bank, a messageboard where people can post the ideas they would like to see adopted by BitTorrent's programmers. This page can be used as a text in the way that it demonstrates the user attitudes toward collaboration in bittorrent. The page shows conversation in fourteen posts. Firstly, we see something of the ideology of bittorrent, coming from the culture of Open Source software it actively invites the user's input into development. The conversation is interesting because it presents distinct 'for' and 'against' arguments on the inclusion of a 'thank you pop up'. The context of the page is salient, sitting at number two in popularity on the requests board, one realises that not being able to say thanks to peers is of concern to members of the swarm. The majority of commenters see the 'thank you pop up' as a good thing (nine 'for' comments to four 'against') stating sentiments of altruism, politeness and an intent to strengthen relationships within the bittorrent community. User Jp comments: "The world would certainly be a better place to live in, if only it's people would start to be kind toward those who share. To become more polite is a small step for man and a bigger one for humanity. I will surely pop one up (a thank you window) to the man who will spread the code for a better living." On the other hand the 'against' comments relate statements as to why a 'thank you pop up' is actually harmful to bittorrent community, Jimmy Hendrix posting: " I absolutely.......... absolutely do NOT want a feature to say thanks, chat, or get to know anybody that I'm downloading from. I want to stay as anonymous and impersonal as possible. Viren......you do know that this is still illegal? request/ban viren chocha." While the swarm is by nature anonymous, users do you yearn for a way to extend a warm hand to members they are collaborating with. Whilst the extralegal nature of bitorrent inhibits the devel
  • Paul Francis on 08 Apr 12
     
    This suggestion combined with the much polarised reactions in the comments section is worth looking at and thinking about. Although the majority of the comments are positive and there are a significant amount of votes for this feature, five out of fourteen of the comments are either against it or express that they would not want to use it by bringing up issues like anonymity as well as legal issues. Unlike the interactions within the close social group looked at in the paper "BitTorrents and Family Guy: teenage peer group interactions around a peer-to-peer Internet download community", it seems that some of the users' who made comments about this suggestion do not want to make contact with other BitTorrent users, perhaps because the illegal nature of the exchange makes them feel uncomfortable. Their perspectives suggest that they just want to use BitTorrent for downloading and uploading, and not directly as a kind of community. I think they may have a point, and real life social groups as well as online communities seem to function fine without communication being possible directly within BitTorrent programs. It is interesting to think if file-sharing was less taboo, perhaps it would be more acceptable for social features like this to be directly integrated into the platforms.
michelangelo magasic

BitTorrent Etiquette: How To Avoid Getting Banned From Private Trackers - 3 views

www.makeuseof.com/...-avoid-banned-private-trackers

Net308_508 BitTorrent Crowd etiquette collaboration

shared by michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12
     
    Torrent etiquette is more than just good manners, it is a tool by which bittorrent sites promote collaboration and organisation between users. Torrent etiquette has many faces, it is frequently a formal mechanism such as seeding ratios needed to stay on site or the instructions of Admin on discussion boards, yet it is also something which users proliferate themselves purely through the course of interaction. Etiquette allows bittorrent communities to solidify user collaboration. There are 1,090,000 results for 'torrent etiquette' on google, this page presents one net user's guide to the subject. That bittorrent has evolved to the point of having a widely understood etiquette says something: strangers need just a very basic framework to be able to come and work together collaboratively. Before, people would download individually, now, with a little guidance a group of people from all over the world, with different intents, schedules and backgrounds can work as a coherent entity, each individual not only gaining his or her needs but contributing to the needs of the group. Aside from some specific information on ratios and multiple accounts, Brooks' advice is very simple, "If someone uploads something you happen to like, click the thanks button. If there's a forum, say hi. If a tracker has a list of requests to fill then see how you can help out." Etiquette provides boundaries to the crowd and by looking closely at its form we see that its is very close to the ethics we live by in day to day life. Thus, we realise the power the internet has in connecting people and concatenating the work of individuals into that of an organisation. References Brookes, T. (2010). Torrent Etiquette: How to avoid getting banned from private trackers . Retrieved 20th March from http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/bittorrent-etiquette-avoid-banned-private-trackers/.
  • Paul Francis on 08 Apr 12
     
    This page, rather than looking mostly at rules like my articles, also addresses etiquette, at least for private torrent trackers. Although some of the etiquette described could be applied to public torrent trackers, it is mostly relevant only to the more exclusive private torrent trackers. Rather than this being a weakness of this page for the subject, it is useful to note that fair use and courtesy by people using BitTorrent is much more likely to happen in smaller communities, and doesn't necessarily apply to BitTorrent as a whole. The collaboration that occurs through BitTorrent becomes more like collaboration when it is governed by these kinds of social interactions between users in the same private community. This page mentions ways which users can help out other individuals, for example by looking at someone's list of requests, or hitting a "thanks" button on someone's torrent. These seem much more specifically collaborative interactions than what occurs through the actual BitTorrent downloading process, where everything is automatic. Overall this is an interesting page, but I would suggest keeping in mind that the etiquette described doesn't apply directly to all BitTorrent activity. Many users going through public torrent trackers likely don't feel any kind of reason to observe any of this etiquette and will share what the protocols of BitTorrent make them share.
  • owen_davies on 10 Apr 12
     
    Like the many articles that I looked at a few weeks ago, Brookes gives us a brief introduction into how private tracking helps to create mechanisms for interaction and how these websites promote a good social etiquette and overall community for users. He shows a similar opinion to many others in that people do not require much in order to feel part of a community. According to Brookes, the introduction of communities to the bit torrent world, has taken away the more individualistic downloader. Through the private trackers it has seen these collaborative communities sprout up and instead of individuals selfishly downloading for themselves they are now working and contributing for others and are helping the whole group function. His overall belief that the etiquette element of these communities is key and that if they are to function properly, that each person should be willing to help out when required. As I mentioned, many of the other articles that I reviewed, for example Incentives in Bit Torrent Induce Free Riding (2005) written by Jun, S., Ahamad are of a similar opinion that private trackers are improving the communal and collaborative features of bit torrent and have made it something that people are encouraged and enticed to participate in.
Chin Sing Wong

Resource demand and supply in BitTorrent content-sharing communities - 10 views

This article examined about the resources supply and demand and the relation between three different BitTorrent communities. It shows that the collaboration within BitTorrent communities is relate...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent

started by Paul Francis on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Chin Sing Wong on 10 Apr 12
Chin Sing Wong

Resisting free-riding behavior in BitTorrent - 17 views

This is another article that talk about resist/prevent free-rider behaviors in BitTorrent file sharing network. This paper more analyse from a technical standpoint, propose a quota-based encrypted ...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent Torrent

started by Paul Francis on 25 Mar 12 2 follow-ups, last by Chin Sing Wong on 10 Apr 12
Emily Lloyd

Influences on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities. - 10 views

Influence on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities is a useful resource, not just for looking at file sharing communities, but also to compare to other collaborative communities. For example, I bel...

Net308_508 bittorrent Crowd

started by Chin Sing Wong on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
jessica_mann

How to cheat BitTorrent and why nobody does - 19 views

Personally I use BitTorrent for the following reasons: I find it incredibly simple to use, the program loads quickly and doesn't seem to use much hardware resource and it isn't laced with advertise...

Net308_508 collaboration community BitTorrent

started by owen_davies on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by jessica_mann on 11 Apr 12
Dean Strautins

BTWorld: Towards Observing the Global BitTorrent File-Sharing Network. - 5 views

When I Google BTWorld to assist me see how much traction this paper has gained and to assist me evaluate the importance of this topic to collaboration on the Internet from a non technical viewpoint...

Net308_508 bittorrent Crowd

started by Chin Sing Wong on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Dean Strautins on 25 Mar 12
michelangelo magasic

Influences on cooperation in BitTorrent communities - 2 views

dl.acm.org/citation.cfm

Net308_508 BitTorrent community collaboration social factors

shared by michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • michelangelo magasic on 25 Mar 12
     
    Based on a longitudinal study of five torrent hosting sites (Btefnet, e-tree, easytree, piratebay, torrentportal), this scholarly paper is an in-depth examination of cooperation in bittorrent communities. It relates that collaboration is a social activity. This paper is pertinent as it compliments its examination with data collected by its authors. Firstly, it explores the ethic of sharing central to bittorrent community - people who leech (download) files must later seed (upload) them so that they are available to other members of the organisation - relating this reciprocality as the main incentive for torrent users to collaborate (p.111). Comparing the five sites, the paper examines the different tools used to shape how sharing occurs, they find that the most salient of these is seeding ratios. Seeding ratios are used to ensure that users spend a fair amount of time seeding in comparison to the amount they spend leeching. These ratios are publicly viewable, it is as such that the user's contribution to the community is overt and users feel obligated to maintain this in order to preserve good relations within the group. Users in torrent swarms (collection of seeders and leechers linked via a common file) have minimalist identities (Kent 2012), however, they are not completely anonymous, linking their identity with download activity (p.112). In this way users in swarms are still connected to the physical world and individual identity through things like bandwidth speed, which determines how a user interacts with their peers. The paper relates how easytree, a network for bootleg recordings, had to have ratio enforcement emplaced as the site grew and received new users who were not familiar with the sharing culture of offline bootleg traders who had originally populated the network ( pp.114-5). We see that even within the diffuse nature of virtual entities, online collaboration is influenced by (physical and virtual) social factors (p.114).
Chin Sing Wong

Incentives in Bit Torrent Induce Free Riding - 27 views

As most of my readings are focusing on analyzing the operating status of BitTorrent world, in this task, I found more readings are relevant to the issue of free-riding. This paper again take notes ...

Net308_508 collaboration community BitTorrent

started by owen_davies on 25 Mar 12 2 follow-ups, last by Chin Sing Wong on 10 Apr 12
owen_davies

Communities build robustness in Bit Torrent - 7 views

Van Werkhoven, B. Communities build robustness in Bit Torrent (2010) Retrieved from http://www.pds.ewi.tudelft.nl/~epema/ASCIa9/2010/Papers/Werkhoven.pdf This particular article looks at the mecha...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent community

started by owen_davies on 25 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Chin Sing Wong

Reward only is not enough: Evaluating and improving the fairness policy of the P2P file... - 10 views

To use p2p file sharing networking eMule/eDonkey as example, the content exchange process with credit in eMule/eDonkey and then verify the mathematical model by an agent-based simulation. However, ...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent

started by Paul Francis on 26 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Chin Sing Wong on 10 Apr 12
owen_davies

Influences on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities - 16 views

Andrade, N., Mowbray, M., Lima, A., Wagner, G., & Ripeanu, M. (2005) Influences on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities Retrieved from http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~matei/PAPERS/p2pecon.05.pd...

Net308_508 technology Bit Torrent community collaboration Cooperation

started by owen_davies on 23 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
theresia sandjaja

Intellectual Property and the Cultures of BitTorrent Communities - 14 views

This reading emphasises that Intellect Property has now evolved from the issue of law, ethics and polities to the issue of culture. The shift of cultural model in consuming media online affects the...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent

started by Paul Francis on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by theresia sandjaja on 09 Apr 12
Tamlin Dobrich

Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? - 8 views

www.time.com/...0,9171,1924492,00.html

Net308_508 collaboration community Crowd Wikipedia participatory

shared by Tamlin Dobrich on 25 Mar 12 - Cached
  • Tamlin Dobrich on 25 Mar 12
     
    Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an article which suggests Wikipedia's achievement level has reached its peak and eventually will see its downfall. The article looks in depth at the potential causes for Wikipedia's slowing growth and how these elements could possibly lead to the community's eventual failure. It suggests one reason for Wikipedia's decelerating growth rate is simply that "the site has hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only possible remaining contributions are obscure topics and "janitorial" editing job such as formatting and fixing grammar. The article claims "Wikipedia's natural resource is emotion" and editors are motivated by the "rush of joy" they receive when contributing their unique wisdom to an audience of 300 million people. What this means is that as the need for significant edits diminishes, so too does participation enthusiasm. Additionally, as Wikipedia has grown, so too has the bureaucracy and complex laws of Wikipedia, resulting in a community that has become unwelcoming to novice Wikipedians. The article discusses how Wikipedia editors are made up of a narrow class of participants dominated by young males from wealthy countries and academic backgrounds. The Wikipedia author-base is not as broad and diverse as first thought and it seems "the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing countries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech". This too is given as a reason for Wikipedia's imminent downfall.
  • ...5 more comments...
  • Dean Strautins on 25 Mar 12
     
    An interesting topic of diminishing contributors and a conclusion I had already theorised must be happening for the exact theories stated in the article. I think this article will be good to reflect on in future years. Maybe a future article will be on If You Do Not Innovate Then You Die. I see Wikipedia only having to start including a genealogy aspect where everyone can geo tag relatives grave sites and stories about then and their relatives and what they achieved in their life to see a boom in contributors and tie all the history in Wikipedia to real every day people. So when I read in Wikipedia about a civil war or history of a country I can also choose to see who's firends relatives were there at that time etc. Later DNA results can further be added. So I do not see Wikipedia dying if it Innovates.
  • Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
     
    Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an interesting article, as it suggests that since 2007, the number of people contributing to Wikipedia has decreased (Manjoo, 2009, para. 2). This is further reinforced by the following graph from the Wikipedia website (http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png), which also shows that the number of contributors is plateauing (Bridgestone Partners, 2009). Farhad Manjoo's explanation for this - that the encyclopedia has "hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only editing jobs left are 'janitorial' - seems plausible (Manjoo, 2009, para. 6). Personally, this is what I have found through my own use of Wikipedia, that while there are areas which need some work, they are generally topics and jobs which are rather mundane. The success of collaborative projects does rest on ensuring the contributors are enthusiastic about what they are doing, in order for them to continue to produce quality contributions (Anthony, Smith & Williamson, 2007). One of the resources I chose for this assignment further reinforces this. Katherine Ehmann, Andrew Large and Jamshid Beheshti in Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia find that through their research, an average of 90.3 percent of the initial Wikipedia article text remained over time (Ehmann et al., 2008, para. 40). Therefore, it seems that contributors are less inclined to change a great deal of the original entry, and if Manjoo's suggestions are correct, and Wikipedia does already cover the majority of the topics required by users, there is less chance that contributors will continue to go back and edit these existing entries. As Dean Strautins suggests in the comment above, Wikipedia may need to look into new ways of continuing to engage their contribu
  • Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
     
    References Anthony, D., Smith, S.W., & Williamson, T. (2007) The Quality of Open Source Production: Zealots and Good Samaritans in the Case of Wikipedia. Dartmouth Computer Science Technical Report TR2007-606. Retrieved from http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/reports/TR2007-606.pdf Bridgestone Partners. (2009). File: WMFArticlesVsContrib.png. Retrieved from http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png Ehmann, K., Large, A., & Beheshti, J. (2008). Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia. First Monday, 13(10). Retrieved from: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2217/2034 Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success?. Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1924492,00.html
  • FARNAZ SHAMS on 06 Apr 12
     
    This article is related to my topic and starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedians to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia. The article mentioned, there are thousands of active volunteers who are editing articles or publishing new articles, volunteers check articles to correct them and make them more valid. In addition, in Wikipedia some topics absorb large number of people, for example, subject like "Barack Obama" has large number of viewers, however, other articles which are about other ordinary people do not have that much viewers, and this is a big hole for Wikipedia, because it needs to update these kind of subjects too. The article mentions, In Wikipedia's early days volunteers could be easily be staff of Wikipedia and editing or publishing the articles was not hard, but now volunteers should obey some rules and volunteers must gather some credit to get permission from Wikipedia to publish their articles, so, volunteers may think why should they contribute in Wikipedia and these rsule may decrease the volunteers of Wikipedia.
  • Mitchell Houwen on 07 Apr 12
     
    The change in the rate of publishing material does not determine the success of a project such as Wikipedia. New material will be sourced for Wikipedia because the world is constantly evolving. Wikipedia's only downfall is the amount of people that contribute. When Wikipedia articles are monitored by users the mediators can control their own page which they see as perfection because they have written majority of it. This is the exact reason why people have begun to shy away from adding or editing Wikipedia pages. Does this mean however that Wikipedia will fail at some point? I believe nothing could be further from the truth. I think Wikipedia will simply run in cycles as new topics are generated therefore new experts will be required to moderate and new people needed to add subject matter. As more people begin to collaborate on these pages more and more people will feel confident to edit themselves. Think of the Wikipedia cycle as one that is constantly changing with both highs and lows of activity. This current inactive period will not last long. This unit looks at the collaborative process that is being undertaken throughout the web and it is important to understand that without people adding their own pieces the puzzle is never going to be finished. Will Wikipedia run the cycle as my theory predicts?
  • michelangelo magasic on 08 Apr 12
     
    This article brings up a very interesting idea: the concept of an endpoint for Web 2.0 communities. As the author relates it, this would occur as a Malthusian collapse. Whilst at first glance this seems unfeasible given the infinite expanse of virtual pastures, the article makes some interesting points for consideration: the number of contributors on Wikipedia is dropping and it seems the we have run out of topics to write. It is interesting to compare the Wikipedia community to that of Bittorrent which has found renewed growth, and purpose, in the context of its struggle against copyright laws. Wikipedia has been hailed as a revolutionary form of knowledge democratisation, it is hard to imagine that wikipedians don't share a sense of purpose in their collaboration, and, perhaps even harder to imagine that we are running out of things to write about. Whilst this article is from a highly reputable source, its bias might be considered in following that of the conservative media toward copyleft, this is highlighted by phrases like 'Wikipedia's joyride' which suggests the growth of the site as frivolous. Considering the data it presents, the article is certainly very relevant to an understanding of online collaboration and thought provoking. I cannot help but think that there are still multitudes of topics to be written about, how many contributors, for example, have penned a page for themselves? Whilst ostensibly trivial, this might be the kind of interaction that sees renewed interest in the site and attracts the minority demographics which Gardner says the site needs to make its community richer (p.2). Perhaps the flagging interest in the site comes from the reason that the site is moving too close to the status quo, that as the BitTorrent community has seen, it needs to reminded of its position in an ideological shift.
  • FARNAZ SHAMS on 10 Apr 12
     
    This article starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedia's to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia (Manjoo, 2009). According to my own studies, Wikipedia has different level of articles; they divided to low-, medium- and high quality and different people must play different roles, such as linking, editing and writing. For example, cleaning up other editor's mistake is a very important part, because some people do not add valuable information and some editors must come to increase articles quality and maybe the article needs another editor to correct the article again and this process may need to continue many times to increase quality of that article. However, that does not mean casual users work is not worthy, because, they can absorb more well-rounded contributors to make more valuable articles. To help contributors, University of Arizona suggested Wiki software, which guides contributors to know what should they do, for example, they will aware the article needs more link, references or it needs more editing and writing (Conger, 2010). Conger, C. (2010). Who writes Wikipedia articles? Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/human/wikipedia-community-articles.html
Chin Sing Wong

Peer-to-Peer Dissemination of Learning Objects for Creating Collaborative Learning Comm... - 7 views

Bulkowski, A., Nawarecki, E., & Duda, A. (2008). Peer-to-Peer Dissemination of Learning Objects for Creating Collaborative Learning Communities. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/28630. ...

Net308_508 Crowd bittorrent

started by Chin Sing Wong on 25 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Emily Lloyd

A knowledge sharing and collaboration platform. - 33 views

A Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration Platform provides a good summary of some of the advantages wikis provide for businesses. Written by Dr Donna Hendrix, and Griet Johannsen, both part of the She...

Net308_508 wikis education corporations collaboration

started by Sian Cooper on 21 Mar 12 2 follow-ups, last by Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
Emily Lloyd

Resource 4: Collaboration in context: Comparing article evolution among subject discipl... - 4 views

www.uic.edu/...2034

Net308_508 Net508 Collaboration community Wikipedia wikis organisations Collaborative Resource Development Katherine Ehmann Andrew Large Jamshid Behesht article disciplines The Wisdom of Crowds Talk Pages coordination

shared by Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12
     
    In the article, Collaboration in context: Comparing article evolution among subject disciplines in Wikipedia, the writers Katherine Ehmann, Andrew Large and Jamshid Beheshti, compare a small selection of articles - some newly created, and some well-established - from three subject disciplines - the hard sciences, soft sciences and humanities - in order to examine the article quality, how it differs from discipline to discipline and if it changes over time (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). One of the most interesting findings that was published in this article was that, contrary to previous research (Brandle, 2005; Dondio, et al., 2006; Lig, 2004; Stvilia, et al., 2005a, 2008; Wilkinson and Huberman, 2007), the articles used that had a greater number of edits than the others, were not the articles of the highest quality (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). Wikipedia articles on average retained 90.3 percent of their original text and in general, only small edits were made over time (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). I believe these new findings still support, 'the wisdom of crowds' theory though (Surowiecki, 2004, p. 5). Even though a large portion of the text remains from the original contributor, the small edits by other contributors over time, still help to fine-tune the article's meaning and readability. The authors' exploration into Wikipedia Talk pages is also of interest, especially how these places aided the collaboration and coordination process and how this in turn contributed to the quality of articles in Wikipedia (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). While Ehmann, Large and Beheshti only studied a small number of articles, and another study is required which examines a larger number of articles, in order to make more conclusive findings, I think this article is still a useful resource (Ehmann, Large & Beheshti, 2008). It is constructive to compare this article's findings to the findings in the Rosenzweig article (Rosenzweig, 2006).
  • ...1 more comment...
  • Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12
     
    References Ehmann, K., Large, A., & Beheshti, J. (2008). Collaboration in context: Comparing article evolution among subject disciplines in Wikipedia. First Monday, 13(10). Retrieved from: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2217/2034 Rosenzweig, R. (2006). Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past. The Journal of American History, 93, 117-146. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/ Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few. New York, NY: Doubleday.
  • FARNAZ SHAMS on 08 Apr 12
     
    I think this article is interesting and pointed wisdom of crowd cannot bring high quality for Wikipedia's article. Talk pages are playing important role in Wikipedia, editors post their suggestion there and other active editors come and follow them or put other suggestion to make a more credible article (in Talk pages the most request belonged to the suggestion for editing and completeness had the less request followed by accuracy and accessibility) (Beheshti, Ehmann & Large, 2088). According to my own research, one of the important things, which mentions in talk pages is about sources of articles which can take a place as print resources, deep web resources external links and inexact references. Disagreement about content of articles is another important subject in Wikipedia and before an article edited, editors discuss in talk pages about adding controversial material or removing content, and then they get a decision to how edit the article. Talk pages may use to notify other users to know this article had recent edit or editors ask their questions there from other or they request for help. However, the author mentioned participation of contributors on different topics is different. There are many articles which have only one comment on their talk page and there is large number of articles who has various comment and suggestions on their talk page (Breslin, Passant & Schneider, 2010). Breslin, J, G., A, Passant. & Schneider, J. (2010). A content analysis: How Wikipedia talk pages are used. 7. Retrieved from http://journal.webscience.org/373/2/websci10_submission_80.pdf
  • michelangelo magasic on 08 Apr 12
     
    Collaboration in Context takes an in-depth view at the collaboration which produces Wikipedia pages. I was attracted to this resource in that I imagined it would assist me in understanding how users interacted in a organised context - ie. the mindsets of users collaborating on a specific, and, in the case of many Wikipedia pages, complex, task. Whilst the paper examines the development of pages from a 'contributor's' point of view, it does this through statistical interpretation of a set of data the authors assembled on page edits. The result is that the paper doesn't so much uncover the nuances of collaboration in an organisational setting, as relate the nuts and bolts of page editing. Perhaps, the mores of collaboration might be inferred from this reading of Wikipedia's collaborative process, though I found it difficult to see this in numbers rather than testimony from wikipedians themselves. What this paper does do is highlight the efficacy of 'talk pages' in the process of building of 'rich' Wikipedia entries. These forums provide the engine of collaboration on Wikipedia - users able to get together as a group to uncover the most efficient ways to combine their work - the paper concluding, "Talk pages - in addition to article edits themselves - provide wikipedians with a powerful means of shaping the presentation of knowledge. (chap.8)" This information is useful to me in the way I will be able to compare it to the, say, simpler, and more spontaneous collaboration of strangers in bittorrent which does not require a 'talk page'. What I would have liked to have known is how the 'talk' on these pages allowed networks of 'equal' users to perfect articles on complex topics, and what the users themselves thought of the arrangement.
1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20▼ items per page