we are now leaving out the value of wikipedia wikipedia, leavingl these wonderful things. we do pay for smart phones. we pay quite a bit. my cell phone bill is $121 a month for some reason. so it's not exactly free, but it does give us lots, i remember how how excited you were when you got your first smart phone. i value it perhaps most of all forgive me something to do in the dark taxis when i'm driving downtown. but think of all the things that were left out of gdp 100 years ago. the transition from horses to motorcars, the removal of maneuver from the streets. what a boon. the elimination of infectious disease. the conquest of infant mortality. in 1890, 22% of american children died before the age of one. by 1950 that was down to 1% or less. joel mentioned leisure something that's left out of gdp. yes, leisure is left out of gdp but when do we get the biggest change in leisure? not in the current age. working hours at the turn of the last century in the 1900s were 660 hours a week in manufacturing. 72 hours a week with the standard shift in the steel industry. they only

wikipedia, a lot of you may know me. i teach about wikipedia, i've written about wikipedia. we have inclusivity as the theme of this conference. it was such a great theme to work with because part of inclusivity is to include people from all walks of life to help enhance, correct, and extend the historical record. that's pretty much what wikipedia does, by allowing anyone to edit any page at any time. so we really wanted to meaningfully engage with this theme, especially with this indigenous people's weekend herein in southern california. eve written a book called is in the wikipedia revolution." i think the true revolution of wikipedia is allowing more than just the winners to write the history books. why is this important? because when we talk about education, what do you think about? you think of k-12, you think of curricula. you think of syllabus. you think of diplomas. but if you think about this, how much of our learning happens informally outside the classroom, especially for the rest of your life after your formal schooling? this lifelong learning depends on museums,

according to wikipedia, he isa haselhurst? according to wikipedias is an intelligent assistant. it offers questions like how old is he? we will not go on to that. we celebrated our 70th birthday this year. we have already seen this year the amazon echo, the voice control speaker taking off. you have a picture of that. and google home. voice becoming the new interface. this is a google mobile phone, using the smart assistant. you also have siri in apple devices and cortana in microsoft. it knows when i ask who alan haselhurst is, a good follow—up question, how old is he? who would buy these things? they are buying them. these voice controlled speakers are out there. it's not so much that these are products people are going to buy, they are out there. they are in the environment, voice control is becoming a thing. this is stuff, when we were younger, we would watch science fiction films, they would be on a spaceship, talking to alexa or whatever? what amazes me is how blase we are about it. in star trek there were devices where you could speak in one

wikipedia as 100% accurate, 100% worthy of unlimited coverage. i will like to see the dollariment of coverage that turned into. that from july 25th to the day of the election, wikipedia e-mails, podesta's name. not wikipedia, wikileaks. i'm sorry. all of that was done because russian intelligence took every document at the dnc and when they couldn't get to hillary clinton's e-mails proper, they went to the aides around her and hacked them and released the e-mails she had written or responded to from them. that's an intelligence operation. that has impact and there is battle damage related to that and it may have been definitive in some way putting donald trump into the white house. >> nicole wallace, our frequent contributor and the communications director in the 43 white house has been watching and is with us by phone. nicole, have at it in order of importance what you took away from today. >> i hate starting this way, but i disagree with just about everything my friend just said. i watched this whole thing and i had the benefit he had of listening to everyone's commendarcommen commentary. i looked like he was unburdened by any personal politics. my husband and i watched it together with our 5-year-old r

wikipedia. it was a little embarrassing to have a wikipedia page opened in a newsroom. you would never admit that you even looked at it. it is not perfect, but it is good. it is comparable to encyclopedias, textbooks. there are a few areas where it's probably less good, like prescription drugs and things like that. what about the editors with the entries? max: wikipedia editors were , white guys who are interested in tech. that has left wikipedia with limitations. there are certain areas of expertise it does not have. there is not much diversity. you have an editor base that is 90% male, mostly white, mostly from the u.s. so you see gaps in wikipedia. the foundation which manages the encyclopedia, or manage may be a generous term -- tends to oversee the encyclopedia, is working on it. but so far they have not accomplished terms. carol: there is no editor-in-chief. max: exactly. there is no boss who can overrule or commission article or delete something. it all has to come from the bottom up. there are different layers of volunteers, administrators, but there are something like 1200 of them. those people are all volunteers. there is no overruling wikipedia editor. carol: that get -- byver: that gap is explained the filter bubble problem yak of max: we tend to think of the internet has something that encourages a diversity of opinion. i can go on and i

wikipedia. it was embarrassing to have a wikipedia page open in a news room and you would never admit you looked at it. now it is not perfect, but it is good. it is about as good as comparable encyclopedias or text books. there are a few areas where it is less good like in terms of prescription drugs, but it is good. >> what about editors who then look at the entries? >> this is where it gets sort of problematic and interesting. wikipedia's original users were open source software geeks. in other words, white guys who are interested in tech. that has left the encyclopedia ith sort of limitations. there are certain areas of expertise that it doesn't have, and there is than much diversity. you have an editor base that is like 90% male, mostly white and from the u.s. so you see gaps in wikipedia. the foundation which manages -- and manages may be a generous term -- but attempts to oversee the encyclopedia is working on it, but so far they haven't accomplished tons. >> there is no editor in chief. >> exactly. there is no boss who can overrule and article or commission an article or delete something. it has to come from the bottom up. there are different layers of volunteers. there are administrators, but there are something like 1,200 of them. those people are also volunteers. there is no overruling a wikipedia area. >> that gap is a filter bubble problem? >> yes. it is this idea. we tend to think of the internet as being th

wikipedia. it was a little embarrassing to have a wikipedia page open in the newsroom. it is not perfect but it is good as it is about as good comparable encyclopedias, text let's. there are some areas where it is less good in terms of prescription drugs and things like that. as comparable encyclopedias, text let's. in general, it is good. >> what is the infrastructure for editors? >> this is where it gets problematic. wikipedia'sriginal users were basically open-source software geeks. white guys who are interested in tech. that has left thein general, it. encyclopedia with limitations, certain areas have.ertise and does not have. there is not much diversity. 11 editor base that is 90% male, mostly white, mostly in the u.s. you see gaps. attempts to oversee the inside. and working on it. so far, they have not accomplished it done. collects there is no editor-in-chief. collects exactly. no one at the foundation, there is no boss that can overrule an article or commission an article or delete something. it has to come from the bottom of. .here are different layers those people are just volunteers. there is no overruling a wikipedia editor. >> that is the filter bubble problem. >> this is what people have been talking about another areas. we think of the internet that encourages diversity of opinion. from read cogent arguments people on the other side. unless amounts of content about anything. we pretty much just

wikipedia. it was a little embarrassing to have a wikipedia page open in a newsroom. he would never admit you looked at it. -- you would never admit you look at it. now it is not perfect but it is good. about as good, studies have shown, as comparable encyclopedias, textbooks. there are a few areas it is less good, in terms of prescription drugs and things like that. but in general it is good. carol: what is the infrastructure with editors look at the entries? max: this is where it gets problematic and interesting. wereedia's original users open-source software geeks -- in other words, white guys interested in tech. that has left the encyclopedia with limitations. certain areas of expertise it just doesn't have. and also -- this is what we wrote about in the story -- there isn't much diversity. you have an editor base that is 90% male, mostly white, mostly from the u.s. you see gaps in wikipediaanages" might be a generous term -- is working on it. carol: there is no editor-in-chief. max: no one at the foundation -- there is no boss who can overrule an article or commission an article or delete something. it all has to come from the bottom up. there are different layers. there are administrators, something like 1200 of them. and those people are also just volunteers. there is no overruling wikipedia editor. oliver: that gap that goes uncovered is explained by what you detailed, the filter bubble problem. max: this is something people and talking about in other areas. we tend to think of the internet as this thing that encourages diversity of opinion. cogento on and read very arguments from people on the other side of whatever my political police are. i can pretty much and less amounts of content about anything. but the way we use the internet is we pretty much just fine stuff we agree with. during the conversation on misinformation, fake news, one of the things people talked a