Bill
Lv 5

If Jimbo Wales really needed to know a basic fact, would he turn to Wikipedia?

Let's say for example, he's on a camping trip, gets separated from the group and gets lost, but he has his iPhone and can surf the Web but not make phone calls. He's hungry, and he sees some berries, but he's not sure if he can eat them.

7 Answers

Relevance
  • Moses
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    If he's using an iPhone, that means he's also on AT&T, which means there's virtually no way he could get any sort of signal at all in a non-urban area. So that means he'd have to use the "miniature" version of Wikipedia that fits on an SD card, but... would he have thought to bring that with him? I think not, since the whole reason he'd be going camping in the first place would be to escape the self-imposed pressures of his own guilty conscience, which he got as a direct result of having been involved in inflicting Wikipedia upon the rest of the world.

    Nevertheless, if he did remember to bring the mini-Wikipedia with him, he'd still be screwed, because the mini-Wikipedia is even worse than the full version. As you can see from the link below, the person who slapped it together couldn't even manage proper use of the possessive apostrophe ON THE SPLASH SCREEN OF HIS OWN APP.

    So yes, I'd say Jimbo could easily starve to death under those circumstances, or poison himself if he tried to "get creative" with the local flora and fauna.

    This would be ironic, since one of the few nice things about Wikipedia is that because it has helped force so many paper encyclopedias out of business (due to unfairly tax-advantaged freeware competition), fewer trees are being cut down to make wood pulp. If there were fewer trees, it would be harder to get lost on a camping trip.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Only if the information is related to some sort of deviant sexual practice. If he wanted to know something about Richardsonian Romanesque architecture, for example, then I'm sure he'd avoid Wikipedia.

  • Robert
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    Your question reminds me of that episode of "The Simpsons" in which Mr. Burns has to eat a 3-eyed fish; his gubernatorial campaign depends on it. But he can't stomach the taste of it, and no sooner has the bite of fish hit the floor than his political ambitions are completely dashed. That scene is so satisfying because so seldom in real life do we see prominent people forced to unequivocally admit that they have been wrong.

    It would be very nice indeed if we could witness a situation in which Jimbo Wales has to use a resource other than Wikipedia even though Wikipedia is supposedly so great, according to him. But if no such situation arises, we will have to content ourselves with knowing that Jimbo knows better than to trust Wikipedia for any information.

  • 1 decade ago

    No, I don't think so, but I can't think of any plausible scenario by which we would really learn the answer to this question. In the scenario you've contrived, how exactly would we come to learn that Jimbo Wales died due to bad information from Wikipedia or from another source? Or by him misunderstanding correct information he read?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    He should have taken a survival course before he went. There are some techniques he could use to see if the berries are edible.

  • 1 decade ago

    Yeah, sure, especially if he knows he's being watched. Otherwise, no, I don't think so.

  • 1 decade ago

    hopefully.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.