|
"Content and Scope of a
Free Universal Encyclopedia"
By J. Harmon Grahn
Dear Friends,
Following is a sequel to (or more properly, a commentary on) Richard Stallman's article, "The Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource". There are a few points in Richard's article I would like to address, not by way of criticism, but merely as commentary and further elaboration from my point of view, which is naturally not quite the same as his. I suppose the best way to proceed would be just to begin, starting at the top of Richard's article, but not necessarily following his exact order of presentation.
-
"An encyclopedia located everywhere."
Richard pointed out that conventional encyclopedias "have been written under the direction of a single organization, which made all decisions about the content, and have been published in a centralized fashion." The consequence has been that what is included and excluded in a conventional encyclopedia is decided by a very small group of individuals, on the basis of the availability of space, the credentials of the contributors, what is deemed appropriate by the editorial staff, and possibly on the basis of agendas known only within the circle responsible for the publishing project. Naturally a Free Universal Encyclopedia published on the Web will face no such constraints. There are no effective space limitations on the Web; there is no editorial staff to make decisions about what and what not to include in the Free Universal Encyclopedia, which may be published anywhere and everywhere in cyberspace. As Richard noted, "The free encyclopedia should aim eventually to include one or more articles for any topic you would expect to find in another encyclopedia."
Yes, but I would like to add that it may contain as well numerous articles and treatises that would never be found in another encyclopedia; if for no other reason, because there is no editorial staff with the authority to exclude them. Because the Free Universal Encyclopedia is by nature not subject to editorial oversight of any kind its content is free to consist literally of anything at all that may appear in digital form on the Web. This immediately raises the issue of the "signal to noise" ratio, which is widely considered to be a chronic problem with the Internet as a whole. Because anyone is at liberty to post anything at all, anywhere on the Internet, there is a great deal of "white noise" out there which has the effect of polluting the data stream and obstructing the search for genuinely "useful information." However, I think there are some ameliorating circumstances attached to the Free Universal Encyclopedia that are likely to render this a significantly less severe problem than it may be on the Internet at large.
The Free Universal Encyclopedia is necessarily the product of a company of altruistic visionaries who are willing to invest their knowledge, skill, craftsmanship and creativity into an open-ended project with no promise of direct remunerative reward. Although the Universal Encyclopedia is Free, there is an "admission fee" of sorts for those who would contribute to its content: mainly the unconditional release of their creative contributions for the free benefit and use of their fellows. The rewards to its contributors of the Free Universal Encyclopedia, aside from its expanding presence as a comprehensive learning resource, will be commensurate with the quality and relevancy of their contributions, which are at all times open to peer review and criticism. Looking at it, I can think of no other mechanism whereby content may be equitably "supervised." The users of the Free Universal Encyclopedia will evaluate the quality, veracity and value of its content and add their own commentary and critiques as they deem appropriate, in the process further expanding the Encyclopedia.
Additionally, as Richard also mentioned, an important part of the Free Universal Encyclopedia will eventually be a wide variety of indices to its contents, compiled by individuals with various interests and expertise. An individual might conduct a search, for example, on a particular specialty, and compile an index, or a list of links to the particular articles shim found most useful, and add said index to the Free Universal Encyclopedia. Other investigators in the same field of interest may later wish to add further links to the original index, and/or add parallel indices to the existing list. Such indices may proliferate around the world, but their usefulness would be most enhanced by reciprocal links among them so that users of the Free Universal Encyclopedia might find their way most readily to the exact specialty they seek.The essential spirit of the Free Universal Encyclopedia is one of camaraderie and the free sharing of information, so it would be most natural for individuals with something to add to a particular index to be in touch with its author/compiler to make suggested additions and/or modifications; and to conduct these transactions in a spirit of cooperation and pursuit of a mutual interest and ideal, rather than in one of adversarial competition for fame, fortune, credit or "one-upsmanship."
Anyone, in my vision of the Encyclopedia, may add any content at all to the Free Universal Encyclopedia, simply by declaring it to be included; but its "presence" or prominence in the Encyclopedia will be effected by how it is evaluated by Encyclopedia users, and the extent to which it is linked and related with other Encyclopedia items. The good-will and shared interest in maintaining and expanding a global source of genuinely free information may be relied upon to preserve the integrity of the Free Universal Encyclopedia as a whole. At least, that is my hope. If not, then the "signal to noise" ratio may be less than optimal; but I suggest it will not be worse, and I expect it to be significantly better than that of the Internet at large.
"What should the free encyclopedia contain?"
I sense that my criteria for inclusion within the Free Universal Encyclopedia may be a bit more relaxed than Richard's, although that is possibly no more than my uninformed surmise. My inclination would be to have but one criterion for items suitable for the Free Universal Encyclopedia; and that is voluntary adherence by the author to the contractual agreement defining "Free Information." And that in turn, I suggest, should be something quite analogous, in the field of general information, to the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPL) in the field of software. That is, in essence, any item declared by its author to be included within the corpus of the Free Universal Encyclopedia is understood to be, to use the term coined by Richard Stallman, "copylefted" such that it may be reproduced, in whole or in part, with clear attribution, retransmitted, republished, modified, incorporated into derivative works, freely, without royalty or other legal encumbrance - provided the terms of the "copyleft" contract are at all times conveyed with the original work or any derivative work spawned from it. The illustration at left [omitted; see vol. III #7 for development of the concept] is a preliminary sketch of a possible panel that would be included with every item within the Free Universal Encyclopedia - although the message it bears should either be more precise, or point to an explicit "copyleft" statement required to convey with all items in the Encyclopedia, or both. The GPL has withstood the test of time and is legally binding; its counterpart should be also, but tailored for the broader domain of "anything and everything" that may be included within the Free Universal Encyclopedia.
Such an open criterion for inclusion in the Encyclopedia naturally leaves enormous latitude for judgment on the part of its contributors; and that in turn may be a source of discouragement to some with the potential for making valuable, authoritative contributions. A preponderance of "over the edge" articles on too many "off the wall" topics, for instance, may discourage the participation of "mainstream scholarship," whose representatives may dismiss the project as that of a cadre of irresponsible firebrands with whom they would be reluctant to associate their good names and reputations. I shall address this issue next.
-
"Who will write the encyclopedia?"
"In principle," Richard wrote, "anyone is welcome to write articles for the encyclopedia. But as we reach out for people to help, the most promising places to look are among teachers and students." Yes, it is an obvious match. Those already involved in teaching, writing, instructing, researching information are the most probable candidates for participation in a project to disseminate information widely and freely. However, I should think it to everyone's benefit to present the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource in such a way that those not directly associated with academic institutions will also feel encouraged to participate. Many individuals in many walks of life beyond the hallowed halls of Academia are richly possessed of valuable insight, know-how and expertise, and whether formally "credentialed" or not, nevertheless demonstrably "know whereof they speak." They should be encouraged to "speak" to readers of the Free Universal Encyclopedia.
Moreover, and not to impugn the reputation of anyone in the academic professions, there are on record at least some instances in which members of that fraternity have in fact "cooked the books" in the course of their investigations, in order to arrive at conclusions in harmony with their theories; or for that matter, simply discovered upon further investigation that they had been honestly mistaken. The blunt but inescapable fact is that "authoritative information" from any source is necessarily subject to the individual discernment of any and all who encounter it in any context. I refer you, if I may, to my essay of August 1997, "Knowledge" for further development of this line of thought.
It is also true (I believe) that anyone may potentially hold a valuable lesson for someone, and conversely, may potentially receive a valuable lesson from anyone. Richard wrote that "only some kinds of information belongs in an encyclopedia. For example, scholarly papers, detailed statistical data bases, news reports, fiction and art, extensive bibliographies, and catalogs of merchandise, useful as they are, are outside the scope of an encyclopedia."
Well yes, I suppose a merchandise catalog, unless in an unusual context, would be unlikely to be very appropriate to the Free Universal Encyclopedia. But I should think it appropriate to include items targeted to a wide spectrum of understanding levels, even including articles, papers and books which are not likely to be understood without an extensive preliminary grounding in their subject matter. There will be those with such grounding, to whom such information will be valuable, and others willing to stretch themselves to reach the necessary prerequisite understanding. At the other end of the spectrum, and at all points between, as Richard wrote, "The learning resource should eventually include courses for all academic subjects, from mathematics to art history, and practical subjects such as gardening as well, to the extent this makes sense. [...] It should cover these subjects at all the levels that are useful, which might in some cases range from first grade to graduate school."
I was once told of a young lady who set herself to learn to play the guitar. After mastering three chords, she commenced teaching the guitar to others who also wished to learn. Now it is true her mastery of the guitar was slight, she only knew three chords, and many would doubt her qualification to teach a subject of which her own experience was so rudimentary. I submit, however, that anyone is qualified to teach what they know, however slight, to someone who knows less and values what shim may thereby learn. It is in the nature of information, learning, teaching and the Human mind that the learning process is potentially unceasing, from before the moment of birth, at least until the moment of "death," and occurs in every context encountered in Life. There is nobody unqualified to teach/learn something to/from someone else, under some circumstance.
Therefore again I suggest that the answer to the question, "Who will write the encyclopedia?" is basically the same as that to "What should the free encyclopedia contain?" That is, anyone willing to submit their creative effort to the Free Universal Encyclopedia "with no strings attached," in accordance with the provisions of the yet-to-be-written "copyleft" contract discussed briefly above, should be encouraged to do so. If such an effort is "half-baked" it may be critiqued or ignored; which may be a learning experience for the author, if for no one else. In any case the author is at liberty to revise shim's effort at a later date, and who knows? possibly go on to be an illustrious teacher and Free Information author of incalculable value.
The context of all this is motivation. The requirement of the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource that all its contents are Free Information "with no strings attached" acts as a very effective filter to insure that only individuals who resonate with the ideal and vision of genuinely free and unfettered information will make the creative effort to contribute to it. In other words, contributors to the Free Universal Encyclopedia qualify themselves, simply by the act of contributing. As to quality, who is a more severe critic of any creative work than its author? Who then is more qualified to decide the Free Universal Encyclopedia's contents than its contributors? And what could be simpler, more equitable or appropriate? I expect these circumstances to combine synergistically in the course of time to produce the finest, most comprehensive, informative, useful and uplifting collection of encyclopedic information ever assembled on this Planet. I believe the Free Universal Encyclopedia will attract the finest efforts of the finest minds on Earth, and will rise as a monument to the expanding consciousness, and a stimulus to the expanding capabilities, of the broad spectrum of Humanity in every part of the world, in every walk of Life.
-
"Making links to other pages."
"The last and most important rule for pages in the encyclopedia," writes Richard, "is the exclusionary rule:
"If a page on the web covers subject matter that ought to be in the encyclopedia or the course library, but its license is too restricted to qualify, we must not make links to it from encyclopedia articles or from courses."
This may seem like a minor point to some, but it is actually at the crux of the issue. The entire purpose and motivation behind the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource is to make information of all kinds freely available to anyone and everyone with an interest in learning. Information that is not Free, as defined in the "copyleft" contract mentioned above, regardless its interest or evident value, does not qualify for inclusion within the corpus of the Free Universal Encyclopedia, for such proprietary information is not in harmony with its underlying spirit.
Because there is no editorial oversight beyond that exercised by each contributor, it is incumbent upon each author to insure not only that shim's creation is fully and voluntarily Free, simply by attaching to it the Free Encyclopedia's standard "copyleft" agreement, but also to insure it is not "contaminated" by proprietary information not includable in the "copyleft" agreement. This is not a trivial matter. As Richard wrote, "We must stand firm, and reject any deal that is inconsistent with the ultimate goal. We are in no hurry, and there is no sense in getting to the wrong place a few years sooner."
The whole issue of proprietary information and "intellectual property" is one deserving scrutiny and penetrating re-examination. It is, after all, a quite recent development in the course of Human commerce, and although alleged to "protect the rights" and "safeguard the interests" of creative, inventive individuals, there is now good reason to doubt whether it provides much benefit to any besides the large-scale interests who profit from the massive sale of proprietary information. For the vast majority of individuals "intellectual property" only puts obstacles in our path to its access, and hence obstructs the free flow of information among Human minds.
If that sounds to you a bit extreme I would like to draw to your attention an excellent and scholarly exposition on the flawed thinking behind the concept of "intellectual property." If you will, please take time to read "Against intellectual property" by Brian Martin, Department of Science and Technology Studies, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
I believe these comments are in basic harmony with Richard Stallman's original vision for the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource. It is an exciting vision, and I am very grateful to him for sharing it with us; and I invite further commentary and input from any who may see these words, with whom the vision resonates. I would like to add that this is a profoundly "revolutionary" concept which illustrates something I have been saying and writing for a good while now, that it is not necessary to "go to war" with "the villains" in order to bring about positive change in the world. It is only necessary to pursue a positive vision and put it into effect. Don't "curse the darkness," in other words; rather, "strike a light." That is what the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource represents to me. It is something individuals anywhere, any time, are at full liberty to do: share with others the information they have, whatever it may be, freely, "with no strings attached." This positive act does not oppose anything or anybody - yet it may literally change the world.
The "next step," I suggest, is to arrive at a clear statement articulating the meaning of "Free Information" as used in the Free Universal Encyclopedia and Learning Resource, and establish a legally binding "copyleft" standard contract to be appended to any creative work intended by its author for inclusion within the Free Universal Encyclopedia. Richard Stallman has had much experience in the development and playing out of the parallel GPL attached to GNU/Linux Free Software and its derivative products, so I suggest his input on this issue will be of utmost value. Richard? Anyone else? (I don't mean to put anyone on the spot, but I hope I'm not the only one excited about this!)
Love & Light,
-- Harmon
J. Harmon Grahn
[To be continued...]
|