Lanier is saying that the intelligence from the collective is harmful but I feel like throughout my life I have been taught to use other people's knowledge to help me and that teamwork is very important. This made me think of the saying my elementary and middle school teachers have taught me all my life.

I feel like Wikipedia and AI is similar because they are both so controversial and are both growing in participants and users. I found an article on wikipedia about AI and it says that even Wikipedia uses AI

AI has recently become such a big thing in our lives today. For a while I was seeing chatgpt and snapchat AI all over the media. I feel like people ask these sites stupid questions that they already know the answer too because they don't want to take a few minutes to think about the answer. I found a website stating how many people use AI and not surprisingly, it shows that 27% of Americans say they use it several times a day. I can't imagine how many people use it per year.

This quote and example enhanced my understanding and views of Wikipedia. I'm happy the article included Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's wikipedia page for reference because by telling me that it has been revised 607 times and there is no evidence of anything rude, or inaccurate makes me trust wikipedia and the volunteers a lot more. I attached the history list of Daniel Goldhagen. as further proof

This piqued my interest because I wonder how there are so many volunteers on Wikipedia. It raises questions like, why are they willingly patrolling the site and making sure there is no vandalism or inaccurate information? What is in it for them? Since it says volunteers I assume there are so rewards for these people so is it just good morals or boredom? I attached a picture of a chart showing the increase in editors after COVID. I think during COVID many people were bored so they decided to take on volunteering on Wikipedia and afterwards maybe it became a hobby.

This information definitely changed my opinions and views of Wikipedia. I feel like all throughout high school I was taught that Wikipedia was not a scholarly source so I always avoided looking on there because I didn't think it was accurate but reading the results of this study and the article attached about this study has changed my views of Wikipedia.

This is interesting because I feel like the istockphoto company has gotten so many more contributors over the years that the rates have gone down drastically. I attached a website stating how much a person gets paid per photo on average which is a lot less than what the article is saying.

I didn't realize how hard it was to retain information in the earlier times before the internet became a thing. This made me appreciate how much easier our generation has to gather information. I attached a picture of how the stock photo industry is growing and people are no longer traveling all over trying to get in contact with people from different places for information. In 2020 the stock photography market value was at 3.3 billion dollars.

This reminds me of the article "Wikipedia and the Death of an Expert" how there are also so many volunteers running the wikipedia page. I inserted an article that mentions how many active editors there are on wikipedia so we can really compare the similarities in contributors.