| > Let's say bad coorporations somehow prevented it? How? > On the other hand, sharing information is easy. Not in the way we are talking about. > The hard part is in trusting that information in the time and age of spam No, it's not. We're talking here about moderated Knowledge bases. Of course, if it's a poor or even unmoderated wiki, this would be a problem. But I've never got the impression that Arch-wiki had this problem. > don't want to share too much by default for other reasons. Sharing what? This is about open source? Is this AI-slope? O_o > Also it is way easier just do something to your own wiki, than coordinate with dozens of others where you share something. I don't think Arch-Wiki has only one maintainer. |
About sharing information in general.
Wikis work in a open way, if they are niche, to not attract trolls or spam too much, otherwise they work by restricting guest rights, banning ip, etc. Usually pragmatically.
"No, it's not. We're talking here about moderated Knowledge bases. Of course, if it's a poor or even unmoderated wiki, this would be a problem. But I've never got the impression that Arch-wiki had this problem."
And arch wiki (and wikipedia itself) is a outlier, not the average wiki, that usually is outdated or plain wrong with no one caring.