The origin story of Wikipedia begins with observing the growth of the free software movement and the collaboration among programmers in sharing code under free licenses.
The idea of collaboration extended beyond software to cultural works, leading to the concept of an encyclopedia that could be collaboratively created.
The initial project called Nupedia aimed to be academically rigorous, but faced challenges with a complex review process and plagiarism issues.
The introduction of the Wiki concept led to the launch of Wikipedia as a side project, which gained more traction and progress in just two weeks compared to two years of Nupedia.
The Wiki format allowed anyone to contribute and collaborate, making it accessible, fun, and natural to add information.
Early contributors experienced the excitement of being the first to contribute to topics and witnessing others improving and expanding the content.
Collaboration in Wikipedia resembled the open-source software model, where code is shared, revised, and grows beyond its original creator.
The process of collaborative creation in Wikipedia became a geeky but enjoyable hobby for many people.
Design of Wikipedia
During the two years of Nupedia's failure, there were extensive email discussions among clever individuals about topics like neutrality and the technical aspects of creating an encyclopedia.
The idea of having universal variables, such as population data, automatically updated across all languages, became a reality through WikiData.
The initial interface of Wikipedia used software called UseModWiki, which had limitations like storing data in flat text files and lacking proper logins.
Square brackets were later adopted as the standard for making links in Wikipedia, replacing the earlier use of camel case, despite the challenge it posed for German keyboard users.
The concept of an encyclopedia in Wikipedia focused on summarizing all human knowledge rather than reproducing full texts, leading to the creation of separate projects like Wikisource for original texts.
Different language versions of Wikipedia may have slight variations in content, such as the inclusion of recipes in French encyclopedias but not in English encyclopedias.
Creating a canonical recipe for certain dishes, like chocolate cake, is challenging due to the many variants and subjective preferences, making neutral recipes difficult to achieve.
Number of articles on Wikipedia
As of May 27th, 2023, English Wikipedia has 6.66 million articles with over 4.3 billion words, and a total of 58 million pages.
The growth of Wikipedia from its early milestones, such as reaching 100,000 articles in English and German, to its current vast size is remarkable.
Notability is a crucial consideration in determining what articles can be included in Wikipedia, and it involves discussing how to draw the line and define what is worthy of inclusion.
Certain limitations exist regarding specific articles, such as not having an article about a specific instance of an object like a Bic pen in someone's hand.
Biographies of living persons require more caution, as inaccuracies can have harmful consequences, and articles about private individuals with limited information are generally not suitable.
The concept of notability varies across different fields, and academic figures may have entries focused on their professional careers rather than personal lives.
The term "notability" can be problematic, and the focus is more on the verifiability and availability of information that contributes to an encyclopedia entry.
Wikipeda pages for living persons
The conversation touches upon the experience of having a Wikipedia page and the feeling of being notable enough for it.
The love and care put into creating and maintaining Wikipedia pages is acknowledged and appreciated.
The potential for hurtful information and attacks in Wikipedia pages for living individuals is discussed.
The importance of credible and verifiable sources is highlighted, despite the flaws and biases that can exist in journalism.
Lex Fridman shares his personal experiences with inaccuracies and controversies in his own Wikipedia biography.
The concept of community health within Wikipedia is emphasized, aiming for respectful and balanced articles.
The challenges of determining undue weight in controversies and the importance of human dignity in biographies are discussed.
The deprecation of certain news sources, such as the Daily Mail, is mentioned as a means to promote better sourcing and neutrality.
The conversation briefly touches upon AI language models and their potential in identifying biased language and improving article accuracy.
The impact of misinformation in news articles and its potential to influence Wikipedia content is highlighted.
The humorous anecdote of false information originating from vandalism on Wikipedia and its potential ripple effects is shared.
Jimmy emphasizes the importance of open licensing and proper attribution in Wikipedia.
They discuss the challenge of grounding text generated by language models to Wikipedia's quality and standards.
Jimmy highlights the flaw in current language models like ChatGPT, where they may make up information to be helpful without regard for truth.
They talk about the need for improved accuracy and transparency in future language models.
They explore the idea of adding warnings or summaries to articles based on discussions in the talk page.
They discuss the difficulty in finding consensus on controversial topics and the need for neutrality and clarity in Wikipedia articles.
Jimmy mentions the challenge of categorizing articles and the potential biases and labels associated with categories.
They discuss the power and implications of labels such as criminal, left, right, and alt-right.
They highlight the importance of careful consideration when assigning labels to people and ideas.
Wikipedia's Political Bias
Lex Fridman asks Jimmy Wales about Wikipedia's left-leaning political bias accusations.
Jimmy denies the existence of a broad left-leaning bias but acknowledges specific biases can be challenged and discussed.
He mentions extreme accusations of bias on Twitter without substantial evidence.
Jimmy gives an example of a homeopath who disagreed with Wikipedia's classification of homeopathy as pseudoscience.
He suggests that bias accusations often come from individuals with fringe viewpoints not being represented as mainstream.
They discuss the challenge of remaining neutral and balanced in politically controversial topics.
Jimmy mentions that biases may persist in obscure or non-political subjects, citing Japanese anime as an example of positive bias.
They highlight the topic of mask efficacy during the COVID pandemic as an example where Wikipedia has done a good job presenting mixed evidence.
They discuss the politicization of mask-wearing and the meta-conversation surrounding the topic.
They express concerns about the damaging effects of the politicization of society and the difficulty of addressing it.
Conspiracy Theories
Lex Fridman discusses the tension between mainstream and fringe ideas and asks about Wikipedia's responsibility to represent both.
Jimmy Wales mentions the importance of contextualizing information and avoiding false neutrality.
They give examples of the moon being made of cheese and flat earth theory to illustrate the balance between credible and fringe ideas.
They discuss the potential personal political bias of Wikipedia editors and the challenge of maintaining unbiased representation.
They mention the polarization of society and the difficulty of agreeing on basic facts.
Jimmy attributes some blame to social media algorithms that reward clickbait and snarky responses.
They discuss the challenges faced by platforms like Facebook in managing content and engagement.
They highlight the role of algorithms in promoting contentious content and the need for improvement.
The conversation touches on the dynamics of engagement and how it influences the visibility of different perspectives.
Facebook and Twitter
Lex Fridman and Jimmy Wales discussed the issue of decreasing toxicity on Facebook and other social media platforms.
They talked about the challenges faced by Facebook due to its business model and the need to prioritize higher quality and positive content.
Jimmy Wales suggested implementing a moratorium on political advertising on Facebook to address issues related to false narratives and dark money.
They discussed the power and control Mark Zuckerberg has over Facebook and the importance of making decisions for the long-term health of the organization.
Jimmy Wales shared his thoughts on Twitter and the difficulties of content moderation at a large scale.
They discussed the loss of trust in institutions and the need to restore trust and prioritize the idea of truth.
The conversation touched upon the limitations of current social media platforms and the importance of diverse and high-quality discussions.
They explored the concept of community notes on Twitter and the potential benefits of curating content based on quality and meaningful engagement.
Jimmy Wales highlighted the need for platforms to show content that challenges users' perspectives and encourages thoughtful discussions.
They discussed the differences between Wikipedia's community-driven approach and the challenges faced by social media platforms in promoting healthy discourse.
Building Wikipedia
The conversation discusses the ability of Wikipedia to present a comprehensive and empathetic view of figures like Donald Trump.
The speaker mentions the importance of community self-awareness in maintaining objectivity and avoiding personal biases.
The composition of the Wikipedia community is highlighted, with a focus on the need for diversity to address content issues and blind spots.
The lack of representation from certain demographics can lead to content gaps or biases in articles.
Examples are given, such as the underrepresentation of certain topics like early childhood development or female novelists who have won major literary prizes.
The conversation emphasizes the importance of kindness, openness, and welcoming newcomers to the Wikipedia community.
The power and influence of dedicated volunteers and geeks in maintaining and improving Wikipedia is acknowledged.
The discussion extends to the broader geek community and their contributions to various aspects of human civilization.
Anecdotes are shared, including the responsibility of managing time zones and the creativity of programmers developing useful tools for Wikipedia.
The conversation appreciates the collaborative and open nature of Wikipedia and its positive impact on society as a whole.
Wikipedia Funding
The conversation revolves around the funding model of Wikipedia and the decision to avoid advertisements on the site.
Wikipedia operates as a charity, relying primarily on small donations from millions of donors.
The initial decision to avoid ads was driven by aesthetic considerations and a desire to maintain neutrality and community control.
The absence of ads allows Wikipedia to prioritize trust, avoid clickbait, and prevent content manipulation for commercial purposes.
Fundraising campaigns have evolved over the years, with a fairness pitch (highlighting personal usage and the importance of contributions) proving most effective.
The conversation mentions similarities between Wikipedia and The Guardian newspaper in terms of their funding models.
The focus on small donors and cautious approach to major donors helps ensure that influence does not compromise Wikipedia's neutrality.
The positive impact and utility of Wikipedia are highlighted, contrasting it with sites that may lead to regretted usage.
The absence of clickbait and the quality-driven nature of Wikipedia contribute to its value as a knowledge resource.
Stack Overflow is mentioned as another useful resource, but the conversation discusses the potential of using AI models like ChatGPT to enhance the querying experience.
Stack Overflow's policies regarding AI usage are acknowledged, and Wikipedia also addresses AI use by placing responsibility on human editors to verify and check information generated by AI models.
ChatGPT vs Wikipedia
The conversation explores the use of ChatGPT as an interface for accessing information from Wikipedia.
Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, is not saddened by people using ChatGPT to access Wikipedia content because it aligns with their ethos of making knowledge accessible.
Concerns arise regarding the potential impact on Wikipedia's business model if users don't realize they are getting information from Wikipedia through platforms like Alexa.
The idea of grounding ChatGPT into websites like Wikipedia and WolframAlpha is discussed, allowing for a more crafted and reliable source of information.
There is recognition that grounding into news websites could be problematic due to wrong incentives and the need for filtering and curation.
The concept of grounding is seen as crucial, and efforts are being made to improve it, which could support Wikipedia's business model by maintaining recognition and traffic.
The close partnership between ChatGPT and Wikipedia is highlighted, emphasizing that contributing to or clarifying Wikipedia can influence the knowledge available to the model.
Twitter Files and Government Censorship
The conversation touches on the deletion process in Wikipedia, where anyone can propose an article for deletion, triggering discussions among users.
The Twitter files incident, involving internal documents released by Elon Musk, was nominated for deletion but quickly closed as it was considered irrelevant to Wikipedia.
Jimmy Wales explains that the perception of leftists trying to suppress information is a misunderstanding, and Wikipedia aims to provide a neutral point of view.
The right tends to be more sensitive to censorship and may highlight instances that appear as censorship in various contexts.
Wikipedia has a strong stance of not bowing down to government pressure and has never made changes based on requests from government agencies.
However, there is acknowledgment that physical risks to staff members in certain countries can be a challenging factor to consider in these situations.
Wikipedia engages in discussions with governments worldwide to clarify how the platform works and to explain the role of volunteers and the community in content creation.
The conversation explores the challenge of balancing communication with government agencies while maintaining Wikipedia's integrity and independence.
The importance of trust, nuance, and avoiding overblown claims in public health communications, especially during the pandemic, is emphasized.
Leaders in scientific positions are responsible for the effects on public trust and should strive to inspire and provide accurate information without politicizing it.
The loss of trust in institutions and scientific communities due to communication flaws, arrogance, and politics is discussed.
The role of free speech in criticizing leaders and the responsibility of leaders in fostering trust are acknowledged.
Wikipedia's goal is to provide a neutral point of view, represent various perspectives, and use legitimate sources to ensure accuracy in its articles.
Distrust in institutions and the public's intelligence to handle nuance and uncertainty is detrimental to the scientific community.
The importance of maintaining trust and presenting accurate information is crucial for the thriving and survival of human civilization.
The conversation raises concerns about the impact of the loss of trust on public discourse, vaccine acceptance, and the broader implications for society.
The Future of Wikipedia
In the next 10 years, Wikipedia will remain an encyclopedia, with improvements in search and discovery interfaces and the inclusion of more AI-supporting tools.
The growth of Wikipedia in languages of the developing world, although unnoticed by many, is an important trend.
Advancements in machine translation using AI and language models can accelerate the translation of articles into smaller languages, benefiting Wikipedia's global reach.
The Wikimedia Foundation is financially stable and conservative in its approach, building reserves and an endowment fund to ensure long-term sustainability.
Jimmy Wales believes that Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation will continue to exist in a hundred years, although he anticipates unpredictable changes in the internet and the web.
The development of large language models, like GPT-3, is seen as a remarkable step forward but raises concerns about negative use cases and potential risks.
The provenance and trustworthiness of traditional brands, such as news organizations, are expected to gain more significance in an era of AI-generated content.
Citizen journalism can play a role as long as it builds stable, verifiable trust over time and develops credibility comparable to traditional journalism.
Trust mechanisms, such as content appearing on trusted platforms or being associated with trusted individuals, can help verify information and build trust in specific content pieces.
The integration of different perspectives and biases from trusted sources can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of various topics.
Jimmy Wales emphasizes the importance of credibility and trust in the information ecosystem, and the need for platforms and mechanisms to establish and verify trust.
Advice for Young People and Meaning of Life
Pursue something you are truly passionate about rather than focusing solely on monetary gain to have a successful and impactful career.
Be persistent in pursuing your goals and be prepared to pivot and change direction when necessary.
Understand that success comes in various forms and comparing oneself to billionaires is not a realistic or healthy measure of success.
Wikipedia's persistence with its ad-free business model in the face of ad-driven websites like Google and Facebook is inspiring.
The meaning of life and the purpose of human civilization are subjective and internal, with individuals determining their own meaning and purpose.
The exploration of space and human survival beyond Earth is an interesting concept but may not be a motivating factor for most individuals.
The focus should be on sustainable practices and solving long-term human problems, such as health and climate change.
AI and technology advancements have the potential to solve complex issues and alleviate human suffering.
The preservation and dissemination of human knowledge, as exemplified by Wikipedia, is crucial to human progress and understanding.
Access to diverse cultures and knowledge through machine translation and technology is exciting and can foster greater understanding and appreciation.
Blocking access to Wikipedia limits the sharing of culture and knowledge, preventing people from telling their stories and being understood.
Everyone should have a voice, and platforms like Wikipedia can help bridge gaps in understanding between cultures.
Expressing gratitude for Wikipedia and encouraging support through donations.