The Joy of Learning Random Things on Wikipedia | Annie Rauwerda | TED

[@wanted_gem]

Most of us go down rabbit holes on the internet. Annie takes us down one of hers, which is trivia of random stuff from Wikipedia and it's pretty entertaining!

[@mind-of-neo]

Oh man, same. I can spend hours on hours going through Wikipedia articles on dozens of different things. I usually have upwards of a hundred tabs open all on different Wikipedia threads. I'm so used to the format and to using it for a basal overview of everything, that it kinda makes me uncomfortable when there isn't a Wikipedia page on something. It's like my mind thinks "if there's no Wikipedia page on something it doesn't really exist on the internet"

[@shubhamkumar-nw1ui]

It's such a wonder that humans so disorganised in groups can create such a beautiful platforms together voluntarily .

[@vito_b0]

Wikipedia is such a fascinating platform to gain knowledge, and i just realized it because, In short, I was being told to not read Wikipedia because it's not accurate. Now, I spend about 30-60m for reading and studying from Wikipedia, daily. If i find something interesting, I could easily click the link and if the answer isn't satisfying to me, I could do more research on Google and KZbin. If the topic is very interesting, I could buy a book of the topic. And I really love improving my foreign language reading comprehension ability as well as my memory of the knowledge I read on Wikipedia.

[@prefferedcustomer]

Correct. Its not always accurate

[@fluffyshanks]

What a brilliant Ted Talk!!! One of my favourite pastimes is to click on the day’s featured article (regardless of the subject) and read and click on hyperlinks and generally disappear down a Wiki-rabbit hole.

[@jamesdignanmusic2765]

Be warned... I started editing Wikipedia after being fascinated by reading it. I've now been an admin there for over 15 years and have made more than quarter of a million edits, and I do part-time work as a quiz compiler :)

[@saadmuneer-zb1lw]

😂😂😂

[@suhelh6065]

Who cares

[@sonicgamer3839]

Nooo you people are commipidia

[@ryanbaker7156]

@jamesdignanmusic2765 Even edit your KZbin comments

[@marsrideroneofficial]

​@@suhelh6065so why did you reply 😂

[@erfanfarhadi]

I find her way of thinking to be fascinating.

[@Niket99]

Its been long being away from TED... this video popped up from nowhere and I'm again interested in the TED talks...😅❤️

[@shannongreen1520]

I loove going to Wikipedia and I literally get lost in the Wikipedia holes. I kid you not that it has made me a better conversationalist, an trivial pursuit partner and just all around better person. Thanks Wikipedia.

[@mistressfreezepeach]

You have been manipulated, then. I suggest you read about its critiques. It's basically a failed project at this point.

[@shannongreen1520]

@@mistressfreezepeach How so have I been manipulated? Isn't the idea is look into and research information? Or are a bored troll? Which is it?

[@mistressfreezepeach]

@@shannongreen1520 You're welcome. Muting you now, troll.

[@geoms6263]

we all have been manipulated

[@twhylerm]

Exactly. Who knew I would ever be learning random information on random regional airlines in South Africa or the phonetics of French. lol

[@robdev89]

Her enthusiasm is inspiring! 👏

[@orangegreen3769]

I once went on a Wikipedia rabbit hole about the song Hey Ma Ma Ma by Tritonal, which is also known as Sunchyme by Dario G, which is also known as Never Let You Go by Jakaranda, which was originally using the sample from the song Life In A Northern Town by Dream Academy. And I went on this rabbit hole just because lol. And I also noticed that for some reason the Jakaranda version wasn’t included in Wikipedia as being featured on 1998’s The Parent Trap Soundtrack, so I went ahead and decided to add that info myself, so I did 💀. And this was just for fun. Some may say I was procrastinating and/or wasting my time but I say I was gaining knowledge ;)

[@hahah9650]

If you’re really into learning about song history/ies etc look up the episode of the podcast “99% Invisible” that is all about “Who Let the Dogs Out” - it’s so wild!

[@kwandakekana9890]

Someone understands. I want to learn purely for the sake of learning just nje

[@crow_feather]

But it's not learning. It's confusing misinformation for fact from a website with a longstanding history of spreading misinformation. Enjoy learning for the sake of learning, of course, but do so from sources you can actually learn from, not from sources such as Wikipedia that--despite her claims--have a long standing history of spreading misinformation as factual knowledge.

[@andrepalomaro353]

Nje?

[@progredior0]

@@andrepalomaro353Adverb. It is a widely used word meaning “just” or “anyway”, depending on the context in which it was used. “I'm going to buy it nje” - “I'm going to buy it anyway”

[@andrepalomaro353]

@@progredior0 in what dialect?

[@andrepalomaro353]

@@progredior0 I see you copied that from “feel south africa” lol

[@JaySpears3000]

Wikipedia Random Article Button is addicting, buts it usually random geographical locations or random athletes, eventually u strike gold

[@gremarjohn7933]

I was laughing with her throughout her speech. 😆 She's just genuine!

[@shashanksam]

thanks for sharing about Wikipedia, they help us a lot, and they need our help now

[@leumas75]

How is Boston’s “Great Molasses Flood” of 1919 not listed as a non-water flood? That’s crazy!

[@dittocto]

You meant in the categories?

[@hbanana0987]

the p in pH does have a meaning. It’s referred to as “power of hydrogen” or “partial hydrogen (content)” because pH is calculated based on the hydrogen content of the solution.

[@andrxw8097]

Well, yes, it does have a meaning--it just depends who you ask. Some argue it's power, potential, partial, percentage--and those are just a few of the *english* answers, not even considering the fact that it was created by a Danish guy. His foundation claims it to be power, but its quite highly debated.

[@andycordy5190]

Onfim's drawings!!!! Wonderful presentation.

[@13utt3r5cotch]

This one of my favorite ted talks❤

[@TheTrig86]

Countless trials to overcome serial procrastination, then a TED talk appears and brings me back to Wikipedia binges

[@timkiemdautu]

The video is great. Thank you❤❤❤

[@raydespoir]

I can relate. But for me instead of Wikipedia its TvTropes.

[@starchaser6024]

The erection of nipples is not due to erectile tissue, but rather due to the contraction of smooth muscle under the control of the autonomic nervous system is a fact I learned on Wikipedia today.

[@rob6850]

That is very interesting!

[@iamdmc]

@@chameleonized yes, they are often utilized to get noticed and are especially potent when paired with starchaser's topic

[@MrValis169]

Thank you, I still feel dirty but thank you. It's not just me.

[@zisanahmed8347]

Love from Bangladesh 🇧🇩❤️

[@Billabonggg2011]

She reminds me of Annie Murphy 😂❤️

[@PaulADAigle]

Since Franz Liszt died, did all those women go Lisztless?

[@candybabyeagle]

Very enjoyable. We'll presented.

[@SaniyaSachinm]

Thanks A Million for this Great Talk. I got Nice Knowledge and it will help me.

[@trinidadtraxx]

You had me at DINKUS! 🤣

[@user_user1337]

Very good talk. I agree with almost all of it. I personally stopped editing wikipedia though because of petty moderators using their power to keep exactly those interesting facts out.

[@batu_nosel1]

She is smart and beautiful at the same time; genes,god whatever you think sometimes choose a person as far as I can tell.

[@arquilli1]

Why was Coleman Hughes’ talk censored based on TED censorship and bunk/irrelevant meta analysis? Why did he receive more scrutiny than others

[@ÖmerFarukDemir-l3g]

she is so much fun

[@marksgameoflife8446]

This was fun and interesting!🤟😎

[@shubhamkumar-nw1ui]

Thank you Wikipedia.I am a constant donor because I dont read Wikipedia. i consume it .

[@darinherrick9224]

We need a government organization to build and maintain this Wiki. We need to decentralize it and start storing copies on other planets. I suggest we call this government organization "The Foundation".

[@CoranceLChandler]

With Wikipedia on my left hand and chat GPT on my right, I shall rule the world.

[@prabeshstha56]

and that's how I got one million hobbies and I don't know which career to pick!

[@NoticerOfficial]

I did not click for Wikipedia

[@zualiralte3493]

the joy of watching random videos on the internet ^__^

[@Geeksmithing]

Oklahomans don't know the difference between a fruit and a vegetable. Makes sense.

[@users.1]

I love this girl

[@marsrideroneofficial]

I love wiki quote of the day

[@brinax8540]

What is it?

[@can_english]

Wow Thanks~~

[@jonathanbyrdmusic]

Loved this talk! Great skills mastered early. Just wanted to correct that pH means “potential of hydrogen.” :-)

[@spookycanuck1]

The only problem with Wikipedia is that it's not akways correct. There is a lot of bs on that site, hence you can't cite it as a reference.

[@PaulADAigle]

It must stay "Corn", because we don't want to lose "Corny".

[@진수향-g8m]

Hummmm this is like a stand-up comedy for TED nerds lol

[@ahmedhaaqilrifky3531]

the p in pH actually does means something. Its stands for ‘power of’ because pH is the hydrogen concentration of a given solution is based on a logarithmic formula.

[@arcstur]

Wikipedia is awesome!!

[@HolloMatlala1]

And it should be accessible DATA free from all Global Networks vs Free Mode Facebook.

[@frank694]

Service Temporarily Unavailable Our servers are currently under maintenance or experiencing a technical problem. Please try again in a few minutes 2023.10.20

[@SayPedia]

My teacher never told me about Wikipedia.

[@el-swago8427]

p in pH is for potenz

[@canonest]

"shallow learning"

[@kinsmed]

I give $21 bucks to Wikipedia every year (can't remember why that amount). I have a 'triviality' list on Twitter with 9 sources. Yup. I'm that too.

[@SallyMangos]

Wikipedia....Tiktok for nerds lol

[@berkayakca9886]

it fact .ıt was really exellent talk

[@Kender591]

Relatable 😅

[@kaylorado]

Same for me!!

[@catserver8577]

It used to be much more informative, with little nuggets of trivia that you could access in seconds. Pretty scaled down now, too bad they chose to just make everything generic rather than insist on the fact checking.

[@Dr_LK]

I’m sure I’ve seen this before, months ago!

[@Marina-vd]

Wikipedia is your source of information? *dolphin noises*

[@arantin3]

This is so cute

[@maikelvane5185]

Does she know the users censor unwanted information from Wikipedia?

[@topologyrob]

Only when it’s misinformation

[@maikelvane5185]

@@topologyrob Who defines misinformation? A story always has more sides to it. Or are we in ‘1984’

[@topologyrob]

@@maikelvane5185 evidence as judged by the consensus of scientific experts does

[@maikelvane5185]

@@topologyrob What do the expesrt say about for example 9/11? LOL.

[@topologyrob]

@@maikelvane5185 The experts also agree on the facts there - that terrorists commandeered planes and destroyed several buildings. Don't tell me you've been taken in by nutty "truthers" who pretend it was an "inside job"?

[@DanWi]

Wikipedia is not a good source for information. They cannot help but also offer their OPINION of the information. I understand much of the content is user generated, but until this is fixed, Wikipedia is pretty much worthless as an information source.

[@concernedcitizen7385]

I also love learning things.. but Wiki is unreliable.

[@rws531]

More reliable than anything else on the internet. Citations required.

[@concernedcitizen7385]

@@rws531 .. No. It’s fundamentally flawed as a system, and not by accident.

[@andrxw8097]

@@concernedcitizen7385 So, @rws531 provides a valid reason to disprove what you claim, and your response is "no" with no further explanation? You won't win any debates like that.

[@concernedcitizen7385]

@@andrxw8097 I don’t need to win. I know I’m right.

[@andrxw8097]

@@concernedcitizen7385 even Wikipedia cites their sources. they're a lot more reliable than you're sounding. Those who refuse to debate, refuse to discuss differing ideas--they refuse to learn or find reason to solidify their own opinions. it's sad to see, but is all too common.

[@bananabreadguy7960]

The joy of being first in the comments

[@jamestwentythree1976]

I know for a fact there are lies on peoples biographies on Wikipedia. And if you try to edit to correct the lie, Wikipedia doesn't allow you to.

[@spartaka213]

Interesting and 😀

[@rorz999]

WHY IS SHE SHOUTING!?

[@paillette2010]

Donate $3 people.

[@arij3124]

Free Ghaza 🇵🇸 Free Palestine 🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸

[@TheRealWattLife]

That's what they want you to do, remain distracted and unaware of what's really going on around you.

[@obinator9065]

$4.99 special tinfoil hat REDUCED

[@andrxw8097]

Let me get this straight. "They," the millions of independent Wikipedia editors and donators, are all conspiring to distract the whole of society? By compiling a wealth of cited information?

[@MeatMachine212]

Come on, mischievous has only 3 syllables

[@crow_feather]

I come from an indigenous background. My ancestors were indigenous people, those of the Mexica tribe. We live in a world where the irradication of indigenous people's history, culture, and entire ways of life have occurred en masse, causing the erasure of indigenous wisdom to be almost completely destroyed--and this girl, who has no clue what it feels like to have one's ancestral heritage eradicated, has the gaul, in her privilege and her ignorance, to laugh about how hilarious she finds it to be that even further misinformation was spread about indigenous people, causing the even further erasure of our cultural history and ancestral wisdom as such misinformation about us is spread? And then she has the audacity to turn around and go on about how factual Wikipedia is, as if she has any room to speak to what counts for intelligence and factual knowledge when she finds the spreading of such mass ignorance to be as hilarious as she does? The reality about Wikipedia is that, contrary to her claims, jist as it has a long standing history of the erasure of indigenous voices through such examples as the one given above, it has a long standing history of erasing other people's voices as well, as it spreads misinformation as fact. Contrary to her claims that "just anyone," can edit Wikipedia, there has been a long standing history within Wikipedia of barring anyone that long time contributors do not like from contributing. This has lead to people being prevented from fixing factual errors on the biographical pages written about them. It has lead to people who know nothing about a subject to spread misinformation regarding it as "fact," because it isn't checked by scholars who have studied the subject deeply and thoroughly, and know what facts state about a subject, and it has caused deep ignorance to ne spread about not only indigenous ways of life, but the histories of both individuals and historical events as a whole, because that, of course, is what occurs when misinformation is spread by those with educated, scholarly knowledge of the subjects they speak about. She claims that Wikipedia has been found to be more accurate than the Encyclopedia Britanica, but given how hilarious she finds such smearing of indigenous history to be, I strongly question how accurate these supposed studies are. Wikipedia is not factual. It is the spreading of a narrative based upon what people, often without educated understanding of a subject whatsoever, want to be true, and spreading this as factual knowledge. Thanks to this, cultural wisdom is further eradicated, people's voices are erased by being unable to fact check their own biographies to assure the truth about them is being spread, factual knowledge about subjects is lost, and history is rewritten as Wikipedia's misinformation is further mistaken for scholarly knowledge. This not only spreads misinformation, but shapes our thinking as a whole, and is why Wikipedia should never be a replacement for articles written by scholars with a deep understanding of the facts that we as people deserve to have!

[@samusande6461]

❤

[@kin0cho]

👍

[@Zeeshan2432]

❤❤❤

[@iamdmc]

Presenting: Evidence supporting the theory that we reached our peak IQ in the 1970s and have been declining ever since... apparently at an accelerating rate

[@mariaantoniettamontella9173]

brava🤗😅

[@34547]

Wikipedia is brit nat propaganda.

[@vanessabernal8808]

Is there anyone who wants to learn Spanish and can teach me English?

[@lifebyvikk6751]

If it talks like a nerd, dresses like a nerd....

[@fishingarchitect4644]

Wiki is interesting but often as wrong as it is right. Never use it as an encyclopedia. The problem is the editors are often opinionated and not factual.

[@tishtashtishtash]

The cameltoe is distracting

[@Atlantis858]

her clothes are weird

[@looofplaying]

That has nothing to do with anything she said my guy

[@goweschannel4305]

Nice camel toe... very interesting wikipedia...

[@sonicgamer3839]

Wokepidia

[@topologyrob]

Why? Because it doesn’t put up with idiotic anti-vax made up conspiracy theories?

[@NeelleeStenat]

The journey becomes even more attractive when you realize that Wikipedia is a strongest source of propaganda.

[@sonicgamer3839]

Best propaganda site

[@34547]

Second this.

[@sonicgamer3839]

@@34547 waaaat

[@topologyrob]

Nope. Just evidence based

[@sonicgamer3839]

@@topologyrob according to Wokipedia Man is a woman 🤦

[@topologyrob]

@@sonicgamer3839 where?

[@priyanshiigupta]

if you use wikipedia as your source of information, you’re HIGHLY misinformed about a lot of things

[@andrxw8097]

Wikipedia is *A* source of information, not THE only one anyone's using. Being more trustworthy than the Encyclopedia Britannica, it is valuable and important as a tool. Obviously, if you use any 1 thing as your only source of information, then you are susceptible to trusting misinformation. Luckily, Wikipedia articles cite every source they use so you can independently verify information.

[@basv]

Wikipedia...? 🤡

[@Quietriot1970]

Omfg please someone tell her you ever should rely on Wikipedia as it is often wrong. Any silly Billy can post on their as fact when it's complete bs. That's why in university you can't use it to quote fact.

[@andrxw8097]

Every change made on Wikipedia is monitored and verified by other writers. Any errors are fixed within 5 mins maximum and I'm not even exaggerating. College professors are often smart enough to see the value of Wikipedia and even recommend it as a starting point. They cite all of their sources, so you can just go to the source instead of literally relying on what's written on Wiki.

[@Yobinski4900]

Is this a bad stand up wannabe?

[@suhelh6065]

Over the course of the years, the quality of TED has just downgraded to a point now it's just random people giving talks about random things

[@looofplaying]

That has literally always been the point of TED talks.

[@geoms6263]

why wiki when you have chatgtp?

[@dopedreamz]

This is absolute nonsense, wiki is in no way factual. Learn facts not opinion.

[@topologyrob]

Of course it is factual - weird nonsensical comment based in pure fantasy

[@dopedreamz]

@@topologyrob there is no process by which wiki is put though the scientific process, anyone, including myself can go on and edit wiki to my own opinion. There’s a reason you can’t reference wiki in academic papers, then to base a Ted talk on those opinions is nonsensical illogical and lacks all credibility.

[@andrxw8097]

Go ahead and try to edit a Wiki with anything non-factual. Watch it get reversed within 5 minutes. @@dopedreamz

[@suncat9]

Wikipedia has a very left wing bias when it comes to political and many historical subjects. I do like Wikipedia, however, for technical subjects, science, math, movie, and TV information.

[@careless_daughter]

the truth does tend to have a left wing bias, yes

[@blattimus]

You think you’re learning things on Wokepedia? Lemme guess: you also think CNN and Fox are news stations?