#Wikidata - interest by companies

Wikidata is not #Wikipedia; it has its own policies and, many of them are evolving as the project matures. Wikidata is "not about facts at all, it is about what sources say".

At this time you are, like me, forgiven that this is not all too obvious. Not that many statements have sources associated with them. Most existing sources are references to Wikipedia even though Wikipedia proclaims that it is not a source.

In Wikidata we do know sources, many items have identifiers in multiple external sources. These are run by all kinds of organisations including companies and public organisations. Much of their reputation relies on the accuracy of the facts provided.

I received a request from India to help with a short presentation for entrepreneurs. The question is how they can use Wikidata both the data and the technology. For me the answer is simple; the data is freely licensed so they can use it as they see fit. I am an advocate of people improving the content of Wikidata on the subjects they care most about.

Wikipedia is different from Wikidata. Wikidata is interested in what sources have to say. When companies want to contribute and clearly identify themselves and provide quality statements with source information, they are more than welcome as far as I am concerned. When this is deemed to be not acceptable by the powers that be, companies, organisations can provide an identifier to their resource and, our discerning public can gain access to that part of the sum of all knowledge anyway.
Thanks,
     GerardM

Paying for information, paying for advice

On TechCrunch there is an interesting article about paying for information. The question raised is: is information more valuable when you pay for it.

Valuable means that there is inherent value. When you consider if information will be valued, you get to a more fundamental question: is paid for information valued higher then information that came at no expense. The information from either source can be the same, the difference may be in the reputation of the source.

When a newspaper article is hidden behind a paywall, the article loses its power in a dispute as it is not readily available for verification. When a newspaper is hidden behind a paywall, it will slowly but surely lose its visibility by the general internet population. It will be left with a community of like minded people who will be disconnected from the general public.

When you need advice, expert advice, experts often do add value. They have taken the time to learn their subject matter well. A running shoe sold by an expert is likely to prevent you from injury. A real estate agent knows the market and prevents you from paying too much. By understanding their role, their added value, it becomes reasonable to pay for advice.

It is however not easy to recognise the value of advice. The best advice a person can get is often given for free. It is given by friends, parents. It is valuable because they know the person intimately well, they know the circumstances, the history better then a professional advisor will ever do.

The trick with information and advice is to understand what is provided and what makes it valuable. When you appreciate the value by making use of it and by thanking for the help that was given, you will have grown your network of people that are able and willing to help you.
Thanks,
      GerardM

Approaches to mass digitisation in the Netherlands

I found this presentation on SlideShare by Paul Keller about mass digitisation in the Netherlands.  I want us  to cooperate with museums, libraries and archives, I want much of their material to be available on Commons. I love the idea that the cultural heritage of the Netherlands is digitised; it is one of the best ways of insuring that something is left when a disaster strikes.
 
My problem with the project presented by Paul is that it does not state what license will be used for the material that is digitised. This may be on purpose and I expect that it is, but the consequence is that nobody outside a narrow band of people can safely use it as a result. It may be that the CC-by-nc-sa is to be used, but as it does not say so explicitly it would be not safe for use by anyone. Wikipedia would not touch it because of the restriction imposed for the "non commercial" part.
Thanks,
       GerardM

PS it would make sense for all this digitised material to be stored somewhere high and dry ... above sea level :)

IATE became available

IATE or the Inter-Agency Terminology Exchange became available as a resource on the Internet. An introduction to IATE explains nicely what IATE is about; it is about the terminology of an organisation; the European Union. It aims to demystify the jargon used by the organisations of the EU.

In the past IATE was accessible as well; it proved popular and it was quickly hidden behind a password. This time you can get access by using the URL http://iate.europa.eu and it hopefully means that this resource is now officially available.

When you compare IATE to what it replaces, it is a massive step backwards from a copyright point of view. EURADICAUTOM was available under a much less restrictive license. It would be nice if the EU would steal a page out of the US book; most of the information provided by that government is available without restrictions.

Thanks,
GerardM