Jimmy Wales: How a ragtag band created Wikipedia

Prevoditelj: Dario Lecic Recezent: Ivan Stamenković

Charles Van Doren, who was later a senior editor of Britannica,

1962. Charles van Doren, kasnije urednik Britannice, rekao je

said the ideal encyclopedia should be radical --

da savršena enciklopedija mora biti radikalna - ne smije više biti sigurna.

it should stop being safe.

But if you know anything about the history of Britannica since 1962,

Ali ako znate išta o povijesti Britannice od 1962.,

it was anything but radical:

znat ćete da je bila sve osim radikalne:

still a very completely safe, stodgy type of encyclopedia.

još uvijek savršeno sigurna, glomazna enciklopedija.

Wikipedia, on the other hand, begins with a very radical idea,

S druge strane, Wikipedija počinje vrlo radikalnom idejom

and that's for all of us to imagine a world

da svatko od nas zamisli svijet u kojem svaka osoba na planetu

in which every single person on the planet

is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge.

ima slobodan pristup cjelokupnom ljudskom znanju.

And that's what we're doing.

I to je ono što radimo.

So Wikipedia --

Dakle, Wikipedija, čiji ste prikaz upravo vidjeli,

you just saw the little demonstration of it --

it's a freely licensed encyclopedia.

je slobodno dostupna enciklopedija.

It's written by thousands of volunteers

Autori su joj tisuće ljudi širom svijeta na mnogo, mnogo jezika.

all over the world in many, many languages.

It's written using wiki software --

Piše se pomoću softvera Wiki, koji je maloprije prikazan,

which is the type of software he just demonstrated --

tako da bilo tko može nabrzinu urediti i spremiti

so anyone can quickly edit and save,

and it goes live on the Internet immediately.

te se istog trenutka objavljuje na Internetu.

And everything about Wikipedia is managed by virtually an all-volunteer staff.

Wikipedijom, i svime što ima veze s njom,

upravlja u potpunosti volonterski tim.

So when Yochai is talking about new methods of organization,

Kad je Yochai pričao o novim metodama organizacije,

he's exactly describing Wikipedia.

opisivao je upravo Wikipediju.

And what I'm going to do today

Ono o čemu ću vam ja danas govoriti

is tell you a little bit more about how it really works on the inside.

bit će kako ona zaista funkcionira iznutra.

So Wikipedia's owned by the Wikimedia Foundation,

Vlasnik Wikipedije je Zaklada Wikimedia, neproftina udruga koju sam ja osnovao.

which I founded,

a nonprofit organization.

And our goal, the core aim of the Wikimedia Foundation,

Glavni cilj Zaklade je svaku osobu na planetu

is to get a free encyclopedia to every single person on the planet.

opskrbiti besplatnom enciklopedijom.

Ako razmislite što točno to znači,

And so, if you think about what that means,

it means a lot more than just building a cool website.

znači mnogo više od pravljenja zanimljive web stranice.

We're really interested in all the issues of the digital divide,

Zaista nas zanimaju svi problemi digitalnog raskola, siromaštvo u svijetu,

poverty worldwide,

empowering people everywhere to have the information that they need

omogućavanje da svi ljudi imaju sve informacije koje su im potrebne

to make good decisions.

kako bi mogli donositi valjane odluke.

And so we're going to have to do a lot of work

Stoga ćemo imati puno posla, i to ne samo što se tiče interneta.

that goes beyond just the Internet.

And so that's a big part of why we've chosen the free licensing model,

To je jedan od glavnih razloga zašto smo odabrali model besplatnog licenciranja,

because that empowers local entrepreneurs or anyone who wants to --

jer on daje pravo lokalnim poduzetnicima,

they can take our content and do anything they like with it --

ili bilo kome tko želi, da koristi naše sadržaje

i s njim radi što god želi - možete ga kopirati, slati dalje

you can copy it, redistribute it --

and you can do it commercially or non-commercially.

i to možete raditi bilo komercijalno bilo nekomercijalno.

So there's a lot of opportunities that are going to arise around Wikipedia

Znači da bi širom svijeta moglo osvanuti mnogo prilika zahvaljujući Wikipediji.

all over the world.

We're funded by donations from the public,

Financiramo se pomoću donacija javnosti,

and one of the more interesting things about that

a ono što je zanimljivo u vezi s tim je

is how little money it actually takes to run Wikipedia.

koliko malo novca je potrebno da bi Wikipedija funkcionirala.

So Yochai showed you the graph of what the cost of a printing press was.

Yochai vam je pokazao dijagram koliko je prije koštala tiskarska preša.

And I'm going to tell you what the cost of Wikipedia is.

A ja ću vam reći koliko košta Wikipedija.

But first, I'll show you how big it is.

Ali prvo ću vam pokazati koliko je velika.

So we've got over 600,000 articles in English.

Imamo preko 600 tisuća članaka na engleskom.

We've got two million total articles across many, many different languages.

Ukupno imamo preko dva milijuna članaka na mnogo, mnogo različitih jezika.

The biggest languages are German, Japanese, French --

Najveći jezici su njemački, japanski, francuski -

all the Western-European languages are quite big.

svi ostali jezici zapadne Europe također su dosta zastupljeni.

But only around one-third of all of our traffic to our web

Međutim, samo trećina našeg ukupnog prometa na internetu

clusters to the English Wikipedia,

odnosi se na englesku Wikipediju, što je iznenađenje mnogima.

which is surprising to a lot of people.

A lot of people think in a very English-centric way on the Internet,

Mnogo ljudi ima anglocentrički pogled na internet,

but for us, we're truly global.

ali iz naše perspektive, mi smo uistinu globalni.

We're in many, many languages.

Pojavljujemo se na mnogo, mnogo jezika.

How popular we've gotten to be -- we're a top-50 website

Koliko smo popularni - među 50 smo najposjećenijih web stranica

and we're more popular than the New York Times.

i popularniji smo od New York Timesa.

So this is where we get to Yochai's discussion.

Ovdje dolazimo do Yochaijevog izlaganja.

This shows the growth of Wikipedia -- we're the blue line there --

Ovaj dijagram prikazuje Wikipedijin rast,

mi smo ova plava crta,

and this is the New York Times over there.

a ono ondje je New York Times.

And what's interesting about this

Ono što je zanimljivo je da je stranica New York Timesa

is the New York Times website is a huge, enormous corporate operation

ogromna korporativna djelatnost s ne znam koliko stotina zaposlenih.

with I have no idea how many hundreds of employees.

We have exactly one employee,

Mi imamo točno jednog zaposlenika.

and that employee is our lead software developer.

To je naš glavni softverski programer.

And he's only been our employee since January 2005,

A zaposlili smo ga tek u siječnju 2005.

all the other growth before that ...

Sav se porast odnosi na razdoblje prije toga.

So the servers are managed by a ragtag band of volunteers.

Dakle, svim serverima upravlja ekipa raznovrsnih volontera.

All the editing is done by volunteers.

Svo uređivanje također obavljaju volonteri.

And the way that we're organized

Način na koji smo organizirani

is not like any traditional organization you can imagine.

ne možete naći ni u jednoj tradicionalnoj organizaciji.

People are always asking, "Well, who's in charge of this?"

Ljudi uvijek pitaju: - Tko je na čelu ovoga? Ili: - Tko je zadužen za ovo?

or "Who does that?"

And the answer is: anybody who wants to pitch in.

I odgovor je: bilo tko tko želi dati svoj doprinos.

It's a very unusual and chaotic thing.

Vrlo neobična i kaotična situacija.

We've got over 90 servers now in three locations.

Imamo preko 90 servera na tri lokacije.

These are managed by volunteer system administrators who are online.

Njima putem interneta upravljaju administratori-volonteri.

Ja se mogu spojiti u bilo koje doba dana i noći

I can go online any time of the day or night

and see eight to 10 people waiting for me

i tamo ću naći 8-10 ljudi koji već čekaju

to ask a question or something, anything about the servers.

da mi postave pitanje ili bilo što vezano uz servere.

Takvo nešto si nikako ne možete priuštiti u kompaniji.

You could never afford to do this in a company.

You could never afford

Ne možete si priuštiti da imate hrpu ljudi

to have a standby crew of people 24 hours a day

koji su u stanju pripravnosti 24 sata dnevno

and do what we're doing at Wikipedia.

i koji rade ono što radimo mi u Wikipediji.

So we're doing around 1.4 billion page views monthly,

Naše stranice imaju oko 1,4 milijuna pogleda mjesečno.

so it's really gotten to be a huge thing.

Dakle, napravili smo nešto veliko.

And everything is managed by the volunteers.

A svim time upravljaju volonteri.

And the total monthly cost for our bandwidth is about 5,000 dollars.

Ukupan trošak naše širokopojasne veze je oko 5 000 dolara mjesečno.

I to je u biti naš jedini trošak.

And that's essentially our main cost.

We could actually do without the employee.

I bez ovog jednog zaposlenika bismo mogli.

We hired Brian because he was working part-time for two years

Briana smo zaposlili zato što je dvije godine radio u Wikipediji,

and full-time at Wikipedia,

što honorarno, što na puno radno vrijeme,

so we actually hired him,

pa smo ga zaposlili kako bi si našao život i mogao otići u kino s vremena na vrijeme.

so he could get a life and go to the movies sometimes.

So the big question when you've got this really chaotic organization is,

Kad imate ovako kaotičnu organizaciju, glavno pitanje je zašto sve to nije smeće?

why isn't it all rubbish?

Why is the website as good as it is?

Zašto je stranica tako dobra kao što je?

First of all, how good is it?

Kao prvo, koliko je zapravo dobra? Pa, dosta je dobra.

Well, it's pretty good.

It isn't perfect,

Nije savršena, ali je mnogo bolja nego što biste očekivali

but it's much better than you would expect,

s obzirom na naš potpuno kaotičan model upravljanja.

given our completely chaotic model.

So when you saw him make a ridiculous edit to the page about me,

Kad ste vidjeli njega kako je napisao neku glupost o meni,

you think, "Oh, this is obviously just going to degenerate into rubbish."

pomislili ste da će to vjerojatno s vremenom postati smeće.

But when we've seen quality tests --

Ali kad smo vidjeli testove kvalitete, kojih još uvijek nije bilo dovoljno,

and there haven't been enough of these yet

and I'm really encouraging people to do more,

i potičem ljude da ih prave što više,

comparing Wikipedia to traditional things --

u usporedbi s tradicionalnim izvorima, Wikipedija s lakoćom pobjeđuje.

we win hands down.

So a German magazine compared German Wikipedia,

Jedan njemački časopis usporedio je njemačku Wikipediju,

which is much, much smaller than English,

koja je mnogo manja od engleske,

to Microsoft Encarta and to Brockhaus multimedial,

s Microsoftovom Encartom i s Brockhaus Multimediom

i u svim smo pogledima pobijedili.

and we won across the board.

They hired experts to come and look at articles and compare the quality,

Unajmili su stručnjake koji su pogledali članke i usporedili njihovu kvalitetu

and we were very pleased with that result.

i bili smo jako zadovoljni tim rezultatom.

So a lot of people have heard about the Wikipedia Bush-Kerry controversy.

Mnogo je ljudi čulo za Wikipedijinu polemiku Bush-Kerry.

Mediji su to dosta opsežno pratili.

The media has covered this somewhat extensively.

It started out with an article in Red Herring.

Sve je počelo člankom u časopisu Red Herring.

The reporters called me up and they --

Novinari su me nazvali i - moram reći, ime su mi dobro napisali -

I mean, I have to say they spelled my name right,

ali ono što su stvarno htjeli reći je da su izbori između Busha i Kerryja

but they really wanted to say the Bush-Kerry election is so contentious,

toliko sporni da unose razdor u Wikipedijinu zajednicu.

it's tearing apart the Wikipedia community.

And so they quote me as saying,

I onda napišu da sam ja rekao da su "najsporniji u povijesti Wikipedije."

"They're the most contentious in the history of Wikipedia."

Ono što sam ja ustvari rekao je da uopće nisu sporni.

What I actually said is they're not contentious at all.

So it's a slight misquote.

Zanemariva greška u citatu. (Smijeh)

(Laughter)

The articles were edited quite heavily.

Članci su intenzivno uređivani.

And it is true that we did have to lock the articles

I istina je da smo nekoliko puta morali zaključati članke.

on a couple of occasions.

Time magazine recently reported that

Časopis Time je nedavno napisao

"Extreme action sometimes has to be taken,

da se "ponekad moraju donijeti izuzetne mjere,

and Wales locked the entries on Kerry and Bush for most of 2004."

te da je Wales zaključao unose za Kerryja i Busha kroz veći dio 2004."

This came after I told the reporter that we had to lock it for --

Ovo je napisano nakon što sam rekao novinaru

da smo povremeno tu i tamo koji članak morali zaključati.

occasionally a little bit here and there.

So the truth in general is that the kinds of controversies

Istina je da ovakve vrste polemika,

that you would probably think we have within the Wikipedia community

za koje biste pomislili da ih imamo u Wikipedijinoj zajednici,

are not really controversies at all.

zapravo i nisu polemike.

Articles on controversial topics are edited a lot,

Često uređujemo članke o kontroverznim temama,

but they don't cause much controversy within the community.

ali sami članci ne izazivaju mnogo polemike unutar zajednice.

And the reason for this is that most people understand the need for neutrality.

Razlog tome je što većina ljudi razumije potrebu da se ostane neutralan.

The real struggle is not between the right and the left --

Prava borba nije između ljevice i desnice,

that's where most people assume --

kao što većina ljudi pretpostavlja,

but it's between the party of the thoughtful

već između stranke promišljenih i stranke budala.

and the party of the jerks.

I niti jedna strana političkog spektra nema monopol na bilo koju od tih osobina.

And no side of the political spectrum

has a monopoly on either of those qualities.

The actual truth about the specific Bush-Kerry incident

Prava istina o tom incidentu Bush-Kerry

is that the Bush-Kerry articles

je da su članci o Bushu i Kerryju

were locked less than one percent of the time in 2004,

bili zaključani manje od jedan posto vremena tijekom 2004.,

and it wasn't because they were contentious;

i to ne zato što su bili sporni,

it was just because there was routine vandalism --

već jednostavno zato što je dolazilo do uobičajenog vandalizma,

which happens sometimes even on stage ...

do kojeg nekad dolazi čak i na pozornici.

(Laughter)

Sometimes even reporters have reported to me that they vandalized Wikipedia

Ljudi, čak i novinari, su mi rekli da vandaliziraju Wikipediju

i da ih iznenađuje kako brzo se to popravi.

and were amazed that it was fixed so quickly.

A ja im uvijek kažem: - Molim vas, nemojte to raditi; to nije dobro.

And I said -- you know, I always say, please don't do that.

That's not a good thing.

So how do we do this?

Kako onda to radimo?

How do we manage the quality control?

Kako uspijevamo kontrolirati kvalitetu?

Kako to funkcionira?

How does it work?

So there's a few elements,

Postoji nekoliko elemenata,

mostly social policies and some elements of the software.

uglavnom su to društvene norme i poneki dijelovi softvera.

So the biggest and the most important thing

Najveći i najvažniji element je naša politka neutralnog gledišta.

is our neutral point of view policy.

This is something that I set down, from the very beginning,

Nju sam ja odredio već na samom početku

as a core principle of the community that's completely not debatable.

kao ključni princip zajednice o kojem uopće nema diskusije.

It's a social concept of cooperation,

Radi se o društvenoj ideji suradnje,

so we don't talk a lot about truth and objectivity.

tako da nema puno govora o istini i objektivnosti.

The reason for this is if we say

Razlog tome je da ako kažemo da ćemo pisati samo "istinu" o nekoj temi,

we're only going to write the "truth" about some topic,

that doesn't do us a damn bit of good of figuring out what to write,

to nam neće mnogo pomoći da dokučimo o čemu ćemo pisati

because I don't agree with you about what's the truth.

jer se ja ne slažem s vama o tome što je istina.

But we have this jargon term of neutrality,

Međutim, koristimo taj termin neutralnost,

which has its own long history within the community,

koji ima dugu povijest unutar zajednice

which basically says, any time there's a controversial issue,

i koji kaže da svaki put kad je riječ o nekoj kontroverznoj temi,

Wikipedia itself should not take a stand on the issue.

Wikipedija neće stati ni na jednu stranu u toj polemici.

We should merely report on what reputable parties have said about it.

Samo ćemo izvijestiti što je svaka strana imala za reći o tom pitanju.

So this neutrality policy is really important for us

Ta nam je politika neutralnosti vrlo važna jer omogućava zajednici,

because it empowers a community that is very diverse

koja je sama po sebi vrlo raznolika,

to come together and actually get some work done.

da se ujedini i nešto uspješno obavi.

So we have very diverse contributors

Autori naših članaka su vrlo raznoliki

in terms of political, religious, cultural backgrounds.

što se tiče njihovih političkih, vjerskih i kulturoloških temelja.

By having this firm neutrality policy,

Zahvaljujući toj politici neutralnosti,

which is non-negotiable from the beginning,

o kojoj nema pregovora od samog početka,

we ensure that people can work together

omogućavamo ljudima da mogu raditi zajedno

and that the entries don't become simply a war

i da tekstovi ne postanu ratna zona između ljevice i desnice

back and forth between the left and the right.

If you engage in that type of behavior, you'll be asked to leave the community.

Ako se upustite u takvu vrstu ophođenja,

od vas će se zatražiti da napustite zajednicu.

So, real-time peer review.

Dakle, recenzija u realnom vremenu.

Every single change on the site goes to the "Recent changes" page.

Svaka promjena na stranici odlazi na stranicu s nedavnim promjenama.

So as soon as he made his change, it went to the "Recent changes" page.

Čim je on napravio onu promjenu, ona je otišla na tu stranicu.

That recent changes page was also fed into an IRC channel,

Ta se stranica učitava u IRC kanal.

which is an Internet chat channel

To je internetski chat kanal

that people are monitoring with various software tools.

koji posjetitelji mogu pratiti pomoću raznih softverskih alata.

And people can get RSS feeds --

Korisnici također mogu dobiti RSS izvore,

they can get email notifications of changes.

mogu dobiti obavijesti o promjenama putem e-maila

And then users can set up their own personal watch list.

i tako mogu postaviti vlastitu listu za praćenje.

So my page is on quite a few volunteers' watch lists,

Moja stranica je na listama za praćenje nekoliko volontera

because it is sometimes vandalized.

budući da je se ponekad vandalizira.

And therefore, what happens is someone will notice the change very quickly,

Ono što će se dogoditi je da će netko brzo primijetiti promjenu

and then they'll just simply revert the change.

i onda će je samo poništiti.

There's a "new pages feed," for example,

Postoji alat za praćenje novih stranica.

so you can go to a certain page of Wikipedia

Možete otići na određenu stranicu

and see every new page as it's created.

i vidjeti svaku novu stranicu čim bude stvorena.

This is really important

because a lot of new pages are just garbage that has to be deleted,

Ovo je vrlo važno jer je mnogo novostvorenih stranica smeće

koje se mora obrisati što je prije moguće.

you know, "ASDFASDF."

But also, that's some of the most interesting and fun things,

Ali neke od najzanimljivijih i zabavnih stvari na Wikipediji

some of the new articles.

su upravo ti novi članci.

People will start an article on some interesting topic,

Netko započne članak o nekoj zanimljivoj temi,

other people will find that intriguing

netko drugi to smatra zanimljivim,

and jump in and help and make it much better.

i onda ta osoba uskoči i učini ga mnogo boljim.

So we do have edits by anonymous users,

Dakle, anonimni korisnici mogu mijenjati članke,

which is one of the most controversial and intriguing things about Wikipedia.

što je jedna od najkontroverznijih i najzanimljivijih stvari na Wikipediji.

So, Chris was able to do his change -- he didn't have to log in or anything;

Chris je mogao napraviti tu promjenu - nije se morao ulogirati ni ništa;

he just went on the website and made a change.

jednostavno je otišao na stranicu i promijenio.

But it turns out that only about 18 percent

Međutim, samo 18% svih izmjena na stranici prave anonimni korisnici.

of all the edits to the website

are done by anonymous users.

And that's a really important thing to understand:

I to je jako bitno za razumjeti.

Da većinu ispravaka stranica

the vast majority of the edits that go on on the website

are from a very close-knit community of maybe 600 to 1,000 people

radi usko povezana zajednica u kojoj je možda 600 do 1 000 ljudi

koji neprestano komuniciraju.

who are in constant communication.

And we have over 40 IRC channels, 40 mailing lists.

Imamo preko 40 IRC kanala, 40 grupnih e-mail lista.

All these people know each other.

Svi se ti ljudi poznaju. Svi oni komuniciraju.

They communicate. We have off-line meetings.

Imamo i sastanke offline.

These are the people who are doing the bulk of the site,

Ti ljudi odrađuju većinu posla na stranici

and they are, in a sense, semi-professionals at what they're doing.

i oni su, na neki način, poluprofesionalci u onome što rade.

The standards we set for ourselves

Standardi koje smo postavili sami sebi

are equal to or higher than professional standards of quality.

su jednaki ili viši nego standardi kvalitete u struci.

We don't always meet those standards, but that's what we're striving for.

Ne ispunjavamo uvijek te standarde, ali tome težimo.

And so that tight community is who really cares for the site,

Članovi te uske zajednice su oni koji zapravo brinu o stranici,

and these are some of the smartest people I've ever met.

a to su neke od najpametnijih osoba koje sam ikada sreo.

It's my job to say that, but it's actually true.

Naravno, posao mi je da to kažem, ali je stvarno istina.

The type of people who were drawn to writing an encyclopedia for fun

Tip ljudi koje privlači ideja pisanja enciklopedija za zabavu

tend to be pretty smart people.

su obično dosta pametni ljudi. (Smijeh)

The tools and the software: there's lots of tools that allow us --

Alati i softver:

ima mnogo alata koji nam omogućavaju, nama kao zajednici,

allow us, meaning the community --

to self-monitor and to monitor all the work.

da nadziremo sami sebe i cjelokupan rad.

This is an example of a page history on "flat Earth,"

Ovo je primjer povijesti stranice na temu "ravne Zemlje"

and you can see some changes that were made.

i ovdje možete vidjeti promjene koje su unesene.

What's nice about this page is you can immediately take a look at this

Ono što je dobro na ovoj stranici je što kad vidite ovakvo nešto,

and see, "OK, I understand now."

možete reći: - U redu, sad razumijem.

When somebody goes and looks at --

Kad netko dođe i vidi da je netko, neki anonimni IP broj,

they see that someone, an anonymous IP number,

made an edit to my page.

izmijenio moju stranicu, to zvuči sumnjivo.

That sounds suspicious. Who is this person?

Tko je ta osoba?

Somebody looks at it --

Ako pogledate ovdje, sve unesene promjene su označene crveno

they can immediately see highlighted in red

all of the changes that took place --

to see, OK, well, these words have changed, things like this.

i možete vidjeti koje su riječi promijenjene itd.

So that's one tool that we can use

To je jedan od alata koji možemo koristiti kako bismo nadzirali povijest stranice.

to very quickly monitor the history of a page.

Another thing that we do within the community

Još jedna stvar koju radimo unutar zajednice

is we leave everything very open-ended.

je to da sve ostavljamo otvoreno.

Most of the social rules and the methods of work

Većina društvenih pravila i metoda rada

are left completely open-ended in the software.

ostaje potpuno otvorena u softveru.

All of that stuff is just on Wiki pages.

Sve se to nalazi samo na Wiki stranicama.

And so there's nothing in the software that enforces the rules.

U softveru nema ništa što bi nalagalo neka pravila.

The example I've got up here is the Votes for Deletion page.

Primjer koji sam naveo je stranica Votes for Deletion (Glas za brisanje).

So, I mentioned earlier, people type "ASDFASDF" --

Kao što sam već rekao,

netko će napisati svakakve gluposti i to se treba obrisati.

it needs to be deleted.

Cases like that, the administrators just delete it.

U ovakvim slučajevima, administratori to jednostavno obrišu.

There's no reason to have a big argument about it.

Nema potrebe za nekom velikom raspravom.

But you can imagine there's a lot of other areas where the question is,

Ali možete zamisliti mnogo situacija gdje se pitate

je li ovo dovoljno bitno da uđe u enciklopediju?

is this notable enough to go in an encyclopedia?

Is the information verifiable? Is it a hoax? Is it true? Is it what?

Mogu li se podaci provjeriti?

Jesu li lažni? Jesu li istiniti? Znače li išta?

So we needed a social method for figuring out the answer to this.

Zato smo trebali društvenu metodu kako bismo otkrili odgovor na to pitanje.

And so the method that arose organically within the community

Metoda koja je nastala sama od sebe unutar zajednice

is the Votes For Deletion page.

je ova stranica Glas za brisanje.

And in the particular example we have here,

I u ovom konkretnom primjeru imamo film Twisted Issues (Uvrnuta pitanja).

it's a film, "Twisted Issues,"

and the first person says,

Prva osoba kaže: - Ovo je navodno film. Pao je na Google testu.

"Now this is supposedly a film. It fails the Google test miserably."

The Google test is you look in Google and see if it's there,

Google test znači da upišete nešto u Google i provjerite je li tamo.

because if something's not even in Google, it probably doesn't exist at all.

Jer ako nečega nema na Googleu, vjerojatno uopće ne postoji.

It's not a perfect rule,

Nije savršeno pravilo, ali je dobar početak za daljnje istraživanje.

but it's a nice starting point for quick research.

So somebody says, "Delete it, please. Delete it -- it's not notable."

I netko kaže: - Obriši ovo, molim te. Obriši, nebitno je.

I onda netko drugi kaže: - Čekaj, našao sam ga u nekoj knjizi

And then somebody says, "Wait, I found it. I found it in a book,

"Vodič kroz filmske prijetnje: 20 underground filmova koje morate vidjeti."

'Film Threat Video Guide: the 20 Underground Films You Must See.'"

So the next persons says, "Clean it up."

U redu. Onda druga osoba kaže: - Počisti to.

Somebody says, "I've found it on IMDB. Keep, keep, keep."

Netko drugi kaže: - Našao sam na IMDB-u. Zadrži, zadrži.

And what's interesting about this is that the software is --

Zanimljiva stvar kod ovog softvera je -

these votes are just text typed into a page.

- ovi su glasovi samo tekst upisan na stranicu.

This is not really a vote so much as it is a dialogue.

Više je razgovor nego što je glasovanje.

Now it is true that at the end of the day,

Naravno, na kraju cijele priče administrator može proći stranicom i reći:

an administrator can go through here and take a look at this and say,

- U redu, 18 glasova za brisanje i 2 za ostavljanje: brišemo.

"OK, 18 deletes, two keeps: we'll delete it."

But in other cases, this could be 18 deletes and two keeps,

Ali u drugim slučajevima ovo je moglo biti

18 glasova "briši" i 2 "ostavi", ali bismo ga ostavili.

and we would keep it, because if those last two keeps say,

Jer ako zadnje dvoje kaže:

"Wait a minute. Nobody else saw this but I found it in a book,

- Čekajte. Nitko drugi ovo nije vidio, ali ovo sam našao u knjizi

and I found a link to a page that describes it,

i našao sam link na stranicu koja to opisuje

and I'm going to clean it up tomorrow, so please don't delete it,"

i sutra ću to počistiti. Molim vas, nemojte obrisati.

U tom će slučaju preživjeti.

then it would survive.

And it also matters who the people are who are voting.

Također je bitno tko su ti ljudi koji glasuju.

Like I say, it's a tight-knit community.

Kao što sam rekao, usko povezana zajednica.

Down here at the bottom, "Keep, real movie," RickK.

Dolje na dnu imate: - Ostavi, film postoji. Rick Kay

RickK is a very famous Wikipedian who does an enormous amount of work

Rick Kay je poznati Wikipedijin autor

koji radi ogroman posao po pitanju vandalizma, prevara i glasa za brisanje.

with vandalism, hoaxes and votes for deletion.

His voice carries a lot of weight within the community

Njegov glas ima veliku težinu unutar zajednice

because he knows what he's doing.

zato što on zna što radi.

So how is all this governed?

Kako se ovim svime upravlja?

People really want to know about administrators, things like that.

Ljudi stvarno žele znati o administratorima i takvim stvarima.

So the Wikipedia governance model, the governance of the community,

Wikipedijin model upravljanja, upravljanja zajednicom,

is a very confusing, but workable mix of consensus --

je vrlo zbunjujuća, ali efikasna mješavina dogovora.

meaning we try not to vote on the content of articles,

To znači da ne glasamo o sadržaju članaka

because the majority view is not necessarily neutral --

zato što stajalište većine nije nužno i neutralno stajalište.

some amount of democracy --

Postoji jedna razina demokracije.

all of the administrators --

Svi administratori su u mogućnosti brisati stranice,

these are the people who have the ability to delete pages.

That doesn't mean that they have the right to delete pages.

ali to ne znači da imaju pravo brisati stranice.

Još uvijek moraju slijediti sva pravila.

They still have to follow all the rules -- but they're elected by the community.

Ali oni su izabrani, biraju ih članovi zajednice.

Sometimes people -- random trolls on the Internet --

Ponekad me ljudi, uljezi na internetu optužuju da ručno biram administratore

like to accuse me of handpicking the administrators

kako bih utjecao na sadržaj enciklopedije.

to bias the content of the encyclopedia.

I always laugh at this, because I have no idea how they're elected, actually.

Uvijek se nasmijem na ovo jer iskreno nemam pojma kako se oni biraju.

There's a certain amount of aristocracy.

Postoji određena razina aristokracije.

You got a hint of that when I mentioned, like,

Spomenuo sam maloprije da će glas Ricka Kaya imati veću težinu

RickK's voice would carry a lot more weight

nego glas nekoga koga ne znamo.

than someone we don't know.

I give this talk sometimes with Angela,

Ponekad ovo izlaganje držim zajedno s Angelom,

who was just re-elected to the board from the community --

koju je zajednica upravo ponovno izabrala u odbor Zaklade.

to the Board of the Foundation,

with more than twice the votes of the person who didn't make it.

Dobila je dvostruko više glasova nego osoba koja nije ušla.

And I always embarrass her because I say,

Uvijek je osramotim kad kažem da Angela, primjerice,

"Well, Angela, for example,

could get away with doing absolutely anything within Wikipedia,

može raditi što god poželi na Wikipediji

because she's so admired and so powerful."

zato što je toliko cijenjena i moćna.

But the irony is, of course, that Angela can do this because she's the one person

Ali ironija je u tome što Angela može napraviti nešto takvo

zato što je ona takva osoba koja ama baš nikada ne bi prekršila

who you know would never, ever break any rules of Wikipedia.

niti jedno pravilo Wikipedije.

And I also like to say she's the only person

Također želim reći da je ona jedina osoba

who actually knows all the rules of Wikipedia, so ...

koja zapravo zna sva pravila Wikipedije.

And then there's monarchy,

Onda imamo monarhiju. To je moja uloga u zajednici.

and that's my role on the community, so ...

(Laughter)

(Smijeh.)

I was describing this in Berlin once,

Opisivao sam ovo jednom u Berlinu

and the next day in the newspaper the headline said,

i sljedeći dan u novinama je izašao naslov "Ja sam engleska kraljica."

"I am the Queen of England."

(Laughter)

And that's not exactly what I said, but --

Nisam rekao točno to, ali ... (Smijeh)

(Laughter)

the point is my role in the community --

Uglavnom, moja uloga u zajednici -

Within the free software world, there's been a long-standing tradition

u svijetu besplatnog softvera već dugo vremena postoji tradicija

of the "benevolent dictator" model.

modela "dobronamjernog diktatora".

So if you look at most of the major free software projects,

Ako pogledate većinu velikih projekata besplatnih softvera,

they have one single person in charge

svi oni imaju jednu osobu na čelu

who everyone agrees is the benevolent dictator.

za koju se svi slažu da je dobronamjerni diktator.

Well, I don't like the term "benevolent dictator,"

Ja ne volim taj izraz

and I don't think that it's my job or my role in the world of ideas

i ne mislim da je moja zadaća i moj posao u svijetu ideja

to be the dictator of the future of all human knowledge

biti diktatorom budućnosti svega znanja koje je čovječanstvo nakupilo.

compiled by the world.

It just isn't appropriate.

Jednostavno nije prikladno.

But there is a need still for a certain amount of monarchy,

Ali potrebna je jedna razina monarhije.

a certain amount of --

sometimes we have to make a decision

Ponekad trebamo donijeti odluku,

and we don't want to get bogged down too heavily

a ne želimo previše zaglibiti u formalne procese odlučivanja.

in formal decision-making processes.

So as an example of how this can be important:

Primjer zašto je ovo bilo, ili zašto može biti važno -

we recently had a situation where a neo-Nazi website discovered Wikipedia,

nedavno smo imali situaciju da je jedna neonacistička stranica

otkrila Wikipediju i rekli su:

and they said, "Oh, well, this is horrible,

- Ovo je grozno, ova stranica je židovska urota;

this Jewish conspiracy of a website,

and we're going to get certain articles deleted that we don't like.

neke članke koji nam se ne sviđaju ćemo obrisati.

And we see they have a voting process, so we're going to send --

Vidimo da imaju proces glasovanja

pa ćemo poslati - imamo 40 000 članova i sve ćemo ih poslati tamo

we have 40,000 members and we're going to send them over

and they're all going to vote and get these pages deleted."

i svi će glasovati i obrisat ćemo sve te stranice.

Well, they managed to get 18 people to show up.

Na kraju su uspjeli dovesti 18 osoba.

That's neo-Nazi math for you.

To vam je neonacistička matematika.

They always think they've got 40,000 members when they've got 18.

Uvijek misle da imaju 40 000 članova, a imaju ih 18.

But they managed to get 18 people to come and vote in a fairly absurd way

Ali uspjeli su dovesti 18 osoba koji su prilično apsurdno glasovali

to delete a perfectly valid article.

za brisanje jednog potpuno ispravnog članka.

Of course, the vote ended up being about 85 to 18,

Naravno, rezultat glasovanja bio je nekih 85 naprama 18.

so there was no real danger to our democratic processes.

Znači da nije bilo prave prijetnje našem demokratskom procesu.

On the other hand, people said, "But what are we going to do?

S druge strane, ljudi su se pitali, - Što ćemo sada?

I mean, this could happen.

Ovo se može dogoditi ponovno.

What if some group gets really seriously organized

Što ako se neka skupina ozbiljno organizira

and comes in and wants to vote?"

i dođe i želi glasovati?

Then I said, "Well, fuck it, we'll just change the rules."

Onda sam ja rekao: - J*** ga, promijenit ćemo pravila.

That's my job in the community:

Moj je posao u zajednici reći da nećemo dopustiti

to say we won't allow our openness and freedom

da naša sloboda i otvorenost naruše kvalitetu sadržaja.

to undermine the quality of the content.

And so, as long as people trust me in my role,

Sve dok ljudi vjeruju meni u mojoj ulozi,

then that's a valid place for me.

to je tamo gdje trebam biti.

Of course, because of the free licensing,

Naravno, zbog slobodnog licenciranja,

if I do a bad job, the volunteers are more than happy to take and leave --

ako ja napravim nešto loše, volonteri se mogu pokupiti i otići.

I can't tell anyone what to do.

Ja ne mogu nikome naređivati što će raditi.

So the final point here is that to understand how Wikipedia works,

Na kraju, kako biste razumjeli kako Wikipedija radi,

it's important to understand that our wiki model is the way we work,

važno je razumjeti da je naš Wiki model način na koji radimo,

but we are not fanatical web anarchists.

ali da nismo fanatični web anarhisti.

In fact, we're very flexible about the social methodology,

Naprotiv, vrlo smo fleksibilni što se tiče društvene metodologije

because ultimately, the passion of the community

jer na kraju krajeva, zajednica pokazuje strast prema kvalitetno obavljenom poslu,

is for the quality of the work,

not necessarily for the process that we use to generate it.

a ne nužno prema procesu kojim se do njega došlo.

Thank you.

(Applause)

Hvala.

(Pljesak)

Ben Saunders: Yeah, hi, Ben Saunders.

Pozdrav, ja sam Ben Saunders.

Jimmy, you mentioned impartiality being a key to Wikipedia's success.

Jimmy, spomenuo si nepristranost kao ključnu odliku uspjeha Wikipedije.

It strikes me that much of the textbooks that are used to educate our children

Iznenađuje me što je mnogo udžbenika koje koriste naša djeca zapravo pristrano.

are inherently biased.

Have you found Wikipedia being used by teachers

Jesi li primijetio da se Wikipedijom koriste nastavnici

and how do you see Wikipedia changing education?

i možeš li zamisliti da će Wikipedija izmijeniti obrazovanje?

Jimmy Wales: Yeah, so, a lot of teachers are beginning to use Wikipedia.

Jimmy Wales: Da, mnogo nastavnika počinje koristiti Wikipediju.

There's a media storyline about Wikipedia, which I think is false.

Postoji priča u medijima o Wikipediji za koju mislim da je lažna.

It builds on the storyline of bloggers versus newspapers.

Nastavlja se na priču o sukobu između blogera i novina.

And the storyline is, there's this crazy thing, Wikipedia,

A priča ide ovako: postoji neka glupost pod imenom Wikipedija

but academics hate it and teachers hate it.

koju mrze akademici i nastavnici. Međutim, to zapravo nije istina.

And that turns out to not be true.

The last time I got an email from a journalist saying,

Nedavno sam dobio e-mail od jednog novinara koji me upitao:

"Why do academics hate Wikipedia?"

- Zašto akademici mrze Wikipediju?

I sent it from my Harvard email address

Odgovorio sam mu s harvardske e-mail adrese,

because I was recently appointed a fellow there.

budući da sam nedavno zaposlen kao asistent tamo.

And I said, "Well, they don't all hate it."

Rekao sam mu: - Ne mrze je svi. (Smijeh)

(Laughter)

But I think there's going to be huge impacts.

Ali mislim da će imati ogroman utjecaj.

And we actually have a project that I'm personally really excited about,

Štoviše, radimo projekt zbog kojega sam veoma uzbuđen,

which is the Wikibooks project,

projekt Wiki Books (Wiki knjige),

which is an effort to create textbooks in all the languages.

kojemu je cilj stvoriti udžbenike na svim jezicima.

And that's a much bigger project.

I to je mnogo veći projekt.

It's going to take 20 years or so to come to fruition.

Trebat će oko 20 godina da ugleda svjetlo dana.

But part of that is to fulfill our mission

Isto tako, kako bismo ispunili našu misiju

of giving an encyclopedia to every single person on the planet.

da svakoj osobi na planetu damo enciklopediju,

We don't mean we're going to Spam them with AOL-style CDs.

to ne znači da ćemo ih natrpati ogromnim CD-ovima.

We mean we're going to give them a tool that they can use.

Znači da ćemo im dati alat koji će moći koristiti.

And for a lot of people in the world,

I za većinu ljudi na svijetu,

ako vam dam enciklopediju pisanu akademskim stilom,

if I give you an encyclopedia that's written at a university level,

it doesn't do you any good without a whole host of literacy materials

neće vam puno pomoći

ako nemate pristup ostalom materijalu koji morate savladati

to build you up to the point where you can actually use it.

kako biste ju mogli koristiti.

Projektom Wiki knjiga pokušavamo upravo to.

The Wikibooks project is an effort to do that.

And I think that we're going to see -- it may not even come from us;

I mislim da ćemo primijetiti jednu pravu -

možda čak i ne dođe od nas.

Postoje raznorazne inovacije.

there's all kinds of innovation going on.

Ali slobodno dostupni udžbenici su nova moda u obrazovanju.

But freely licensed textbooks are the next big thing in education.