Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

daredtowork

(3,732 posts)

4. Wikipedia

Reply to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Thu Feb 5, 2015, 12:32 AM

Feb 2015

While Wikipedia itself may not be for profit, you can't say that all that anonymous crowd-sourced work did not ultimately benefit the career/prestige of Jimmy Wales, his other entrepreneurial ventures, and his rolodex "talking head" tech world authority. The value and exploitation of work isn't always measured in money. Amazon has clearly been groping for ways to monetize the Wikipedia model.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Libraries, Gentrification, and Amazon's Crowd-Sourcing Evil [View all] daredtowork Feb 2015 OP

Very interesting. Thanks. JDPriestly Feb 2015 #1

thankyou for saying this olddots Feb 2015 #2

Amazon and Wikipedia are significantly different. Jim Lane Feb 2015 #3

Wikipedia daredtowork Feb 2015 #4