Oh no! The world is coming to an end because Wikipedia is on strike!

Question

Oh, wait. Only the English language version is blacked out. Good thing we also speak Spanish, eh?

The world was supposed to end in 2000 jeje, something about the computers not keeping time anymore. lol! :) - EL_MAG0, Jan 18, 2012

That's a funny joke, but inaccessable would be inaccessable in any language if you're American and under US dictation. - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Land of the free ???? - pacofinkler, Jan 18, 2012

Jajaja!!! My thoughts exactly Paco! Next thing you know we'll be electing a Dictator. ;-P - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Oh, and by the way, I would just like to clarify that Kevin is a buddy of mine that I respect. ;-P - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Definitely. - KevinB, Jan 18, 2012

@DJ: how does a citizenry "elect" a dictator? ;-) I knew a secretary that took "dictation" back in the day! jeje - cristalino, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 1

Yea, and you people are being irresponsible complaining (or mocking it) join the fight and stop the US government from imposing unnecessary & unwanted restrictions. In case you haven't read into the bills, websites like Span¡shD!ct could potentially become targets for censorship. Censorship meaning inaccessable. Join Google by signing their petition against it and Wikipedia by utilizing the resources they organized for you to contact your congressman and express yourself! SOPA & PIPA are serious problems.

Sorry, but I (Mason E. Weaver of Houston, TX) oppose this imposition by our power hungry government.

I'm against censorship, and I'm against the bills. I'm also against stealing money from copyright holders by distributing their works without their permission. - KevinB, Jan 18, 2012

I'm also against using a perportedly neutral encyclopedia for political purposes. Will they shut down if their presidential candidate loses? Will they start slanting their articles to favor certain positions? - KevinB, Jan 18, 2012

It's a slippery slope when you start using information sources as a weapon in political battles. - KevinB, Jan 18, 2012

I've never noticed Wikipedia to do such. But I definently see that happening if those bills pass. Hey, government controlled info resources? How much more slanted can you get? They might as well start book burning again. ;-P - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

And believe amigo mio, I'm against copyright infringement, I'm a musician myself and I've seen some of my work appear in some wild places before I could even protect it! Jaja, I can't imagine the frustration after protecting my work still to get jacked. - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

De Acuerdo amigo! - pacofinkler, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 2

You can either read google's cached pages, where they offer such links in google search results, or you can disable your browser's JavaScript.

Wikipedia's message makes it clear that the point of the blackout is not to make the site wholly unusable, but to make sure their protest message is clearly seen and understood by all.

I salute them for this. This is true representation of freedom and rights for those who forgot they can express themselves. Wikipedia's display of peaceful protest is majestic and great! - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 3

No lo creo....¿Qué vamos a hacer si Wiki no vuelve? Tal vez tengamos que usar de una bibliotecta para buscar información.....Aaaayyyy nooooooooooooo...

But just imagine how much more accurate and reliable the information will be! :) - Nicole-B, Jan 18, 2012

:) jajajajaja - Jason7R, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 4

The legislation in question has been withdrawn, because of overwhelming negative reaction.

//www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html?ref=global-home

This is such a relief! I read like 4 different articles after utilizing your link. I love it when people pull their head out of their hiney. ;-P - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 5

There are copyright laws currently in place in the US. If the government is concerned about music videos on youtube then use the current laws and prosecute posters that violate copyright laws. If youtube is guilty of copyright infringment then I think that every library in the US is also just as guilty. Afterall, I don't pay to read library books. To me youtube is an online library.

Amen - DJ_Huero, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 6

Kevin's right. In the U.S., the English version is blocked, but you can see all the other language versions, so the Spanish version is still availabe. You can still write that report for Spanish class.....

It gives you a space to write to your congressperson to help them in their situation.... - sanlee, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 7

I still got onto Wikipedia, just via Google

Answer 8

Kevin, sí, tenemos una ventaja grande.?

Answer 9

well another reason to keep learning spanish

Good comment Luke, welcome to the forum but please remember to use correct capitalization and punctuation at all times. - Yeser007, Jan 18, 2012

Answer 10

El sarcasmo aparte . . .Quizás no nosotros debemos ser tan dependientes de la Wikipedia, Google o cualquier otro sitio Web (o, de hecho, en los teléfonos celulares,"teléfonos inteligentes", el GPS, los mapas, etc.) Tal vez somos demasiado dependientes de la tecnología de cualquier tipo. Y cuando la tecnología no esta disponible, nos da pánico o se sientan frustrados. Deberíamos acostumbrarnos a hacer sin ellos como una 'crutch'.

Sarcasm aside . . . Perhaps we should not be so dependent on Wikipedia, or Google, or any other website or web destination (or, for that matter, on our cell phones, smart phones, GPS, maps, etc.) Perhaps, we are far too dependent on technology of any sort. And when that technology becomes unavailable, we panic or become frustrated. We should get used to doing without them as a "crutch."

Answer 11

No lo creo....¿Qué vamos a hacer si Wiki no vuelve? Tal vez tengamos que usar de una bibliotecta para buscar información.....

But just imagine how much more accurate and reliable the information will be!

Now this really and truly puzzles me. What is it about hard copy that makes people view it as more accurate and reliable than Wikipedia? Do people really believe that the process of printing somehow magically weeds out writers and editors who are inept, sloppy, careless, ignorant, bigoted, unscrupulous, or scurrilous? Do people think that libraries have teams of experts who vet the information contained there for “accuracy and reliability”? Where in the process of research, writing, editing, printing and publishing is this wondrous magic of ensuring “accuracy and reliability” supposed to occur? Because, I have to say... it ain’t workin’ The only difference that I can see is that once garbage is printed, it can never be deleted.