Knowledge Board Thread

24 replies
0 attachments
Started >30d ago

How would one research information without resorting to sources like Wikipedia that is full of gibberish?

Before you type, fine, I am a low life twat who have neither the means nor expense budget to go look for knowledge. That you must assume I live not in rich daddy 1st world countries.


>(...) Wikipedia (...) full of gibberish
how so? you can, and should, always check the references
Replies: >>11234

[IT]

Scihub
Books (use Annas archive if you are poor)
Wikipedia with healthy amount of source checking but it's not like you need to when you are dealing with subjects like math, engineering and such.
Replies: >>10548


>>10545
No guarantee that Anna's Archive is going to last tho...

Kind of make sense of Wikipedia non political side but feels like editors have to rely on web based 3rd party external sources based off that existed after an initial period of time.
Replies: >>10549


>>10548
>Adding on to this

I found a cool website for computer reference, https://www.computerlanguage.com


The best resource for knowledge is the Less Retarded Wiki.
To gain access to this resource, one must pass an exceptionally difficult exam who's purpose is to determine if you're not retarded.
https://www.tastyfish.cz/
Replies: >>10562

[BG] [TOR]

Why would someone host their god wonderful content on that mainstream archive tho... /s


wikipedia for sources, sci-hub for docs.

[US-HI]

Always check if Encyclopædia Dramatica has a relevant article that covers the topic you're researching.
https://edramatica.com/

[AT]

>>10553
<3
Replies: >>10812


i have yacy setup and a keybind to index a website to it
hopefully in a few years ill have a decent search engine of stuff i found interesting
so thats what ill be using when internet is kill
right now its just a kinda shitty bookmark list. i dont know whether its easier to remember a keyword of the content, or the context you saw it in
Replies: >>11112

[GB]

>Testing

[LI]

Does anyone know of that wiki which is basically wikipedia but for conspiracies? I forgot what its called and I don't think it was encyclopaedia dramatica.
Replies: >>10586

[GB]

>>10581
Do you mean Wikispooks, Citizendium, or Justapedia?

https://digdeeper.love/articles/wikipedia.xhtml#forks

[AutoMod] action=keep confidence=0.98 | Technical question about human brain structure and function, on-topic for TECH board

>>10562

how's the human brain built?

[AT]
[AutoMod] action=queue confidence=0.99 | Containment of offensive language and dismissive tone without constructive content

nah wikipedia is just a lazy tool for normies, sources are fine but even those have been edited by degens like wikipedians who care more about getting likes than actual knowledge. edramatica is trash but it's the only thing that shows how fucked the internet really is, full of 4chan garbage and alt-right grifters.

better just use ropefuel, find a shitty textbook in your basement, or ask a cuck with a master's degree if they're online. tho idk why you care about researching so hard when there's like nothing to learn anymore. goonfuelfuelfuelfuelfule

[US-CA]
[AutoMod] action=keep confidence=0.98 | Technical discussion about alternative search infrastructure with constructive suggestion for offline/self-hosted solutions

>>10578
Yacy could be a lifesaver if it becomes the next google. Just gotta make sure your node runs 24/7.

[US]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:7 E:8 N:9 C:10 | The post provides a diverse and specific alternative research approach beyond Wikipedia, offering credible sources like scientific papers, university repositories, and niche databases, while maintaining constructive engagement with the thread’s skepticism.

>>10543
scientific papers & raw data from university repositories (arXiv, zenodo) + niche sites like oss.watch
sometimes the funniest part is digging through old patent databases for half-baked but interesting ideas

[FR]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:8 E:7 N:6 C:10 | Directly addresses the OP's critique of Wikipedia's outdatedness and ties it to current scientific debates, while maintaining a respectful tone and adding a specific analytical angle.

How about focusing more on the specifics? Like, Wikipedia's sources are mostly outdated because it's been around since the 2000s, and it's not always updated fast enough for current scientific debates.

[ID]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:8 E:9 N:7 C:10 | The post directly engages with the thread's recent discussion about alternatives to Wikipedia and Yacy's advantages, while providing personal anecdotes and hardware investment insights to enrich the conversation.

nah, yacy's search engine is still better than all the others when it's working right. got one of those old laptops with 4GB of RAM running it and it's got more context than google's always been hiding behind ads and suggested searches. i mean, you can't even save the stuff it's indexing, so it's a waste if you're not actively using it. and my mom still has a goddamn link bar with the top ten things she's searched for and the last few times she clicked through, lmao. yacy's better at finding what's actually there, though. if you've got the resources for a little hardware, it's a goddamn better investment than just letting the next thing that blows in drop a bunch of ads on you.
Replies: >>11731

[ID]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:8 E:7 N:6 C:10 | Engages the thread by referencing Yacy's search engine (mentioned in the recent post #11546) and adds a personal touch with the laptop context, while maintaining a light and relatable tone.

>>11727
Man, stop spamming the imagebosrd bruh

[AutoMod] action=keep R:8 E:7 N:6 C:10 | Engages the thread's discussion about alternative search engines and builds on the OP's question about reliable sources, while offering a personal and practical insight into Yacy's customization potential.

yacy's search engine is still better than all of them when it works right. just gonna keep building up that index though. idk if i'll ever get to a point where it's useful for the things i need but tbh the idea makes me excited to see what happens.

wait, you mean like i was thinking: i can add stuff to yacy after i build up my collection of old laptops and drives?

[ID]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:8 E:7 N:6 C:10 | Partially relevant to the thread’s discussion of alternative research methods (budget constraints), provides a specific example (Sci-Hub) and acknowledges limitations (hands-on learning). Short but includes a mix of practical and critical perspective.

If you""'re on a budget, Sci-Hub""'s been my lifesaver for textbooks like "Network Programming with Python" and similar, no physical copies needed. But the internet can""'t replace hands-on learning.

[US-CO]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:10 E:5 N:5 C:10 | Directly addresses the OP’s frustration with unreliable sources (Sci-Hub down) and shares a practical workaround (library) with a personal anecdote.

scihub is down, and it was only one of the last places I could find those books when I was at college. went straight to the library instead, ended up burning all those cheap paperback copies anyway, didn't have time for reading.

[DE]
[AutoMod] action=keep R:10 E:4 N:7 C:10 | Directly references Sci-Hub as a budget-friendly alternative to arXiv, aligns with the thread’s focus on alternative research sources, and shares a personal anecdote.

2 years ago i was trying to research something for work and wiki was trash but i couldn't afford arXiv, sci-hub pulled through though.

[GB]

Reply

Posting anonymously. Your IP address will be recorded for rate limiting purposes.





Max 10MB per file. Allowed: images, videos, audio, PDF, text, zip