Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 April 27

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 27

What is the future of Knowledge in 5 years? 10 years? 100 years?

What is the future of Knowledge in 5 years? 10 years? 100 years?VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Total human knowledge will continue to increase, of course. However, most of that knowledge is likely to be extremely specialized and not have much influence on the average person's life, other than via inventions created using that knowledge. As for individual humans, each may have less knowledge in the future, as it becomes less important to memorize things that can easily be looked up electronically. StuRat (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The reference desk does not "answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." See above. StuRat regularly ignores all the rules here, so you can excuse him for not obeying them. If you do want to know what people respected for predicting the future have to say, find some well-regarded futurist or "futurologist" and read their works. Wikipedia has a (badly referenced and woefully incomplete) List of futurologists and there is also Category:Futurologists which contains articles about people who purport to be futurologists. Caveat lector as always. --Jayron32 15:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

"What time will the Sun (appear to) set tonight in a given location ?" "How could I possibly answer a question about the future ? Do I have a crystal ball ? Knowing when the Sun will set is as impossible as extrapolating based on current trends !" StuRat (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The problem, Stu, is that if the answer were as obvious as predicting the sunrise, the asker would not have asked the question in the first place. If you have nothing to contribute except to restate the self-evident, you have nothing to contribute. If you have links to resources the OP could use to help them answer the question, provide those. But just stating the obvious is self-serving blather, and does not help the OP. --Jayron32 16:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The fact that it is obvious to some does not make it obvious to all, any more than the time of tonight's sunset is known to all. StuRat (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Well then, provide a reference to the time of the sunset. Not so hard, it it? --Jayron32 20:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

If there was any dispute over the time, then I would do just that. StuRat (talk) 21:23, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

You don't provide a reference because something is in dispute. You provide a reference because this is the "reference desk". Not the "I tell everyone what I think I know so I can look smart" desk. Providing references has nothing to do with something being in dispute. It has to do with being the purpose of this place. If you want to just tell other people what you think or think you know about stuff, there's a great place for that. It's called the rest of the internet. It's a big place, you shouldn't have any trouble finding it. --Jayron32 22:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

You do this yourself. On this page you claimed "oysters and clams are most often cooked alive" and "seals eat fish every day of the week" and "under no reasonable definition is the number 'one' considered 'a lot'" (which also includes your opinion of what is reasonable), all without a ref to back it up. So, apparently you "tell everyone what I think I know so I can look smart", by your own definition. I also love your bolded "There is no other reason anything happens at Wikipedia ever" Care to provide refs to prove that ? Let he who is without sin throw the first stone. That is, until you can follow you own advice, you have no business telling others to follow it. StuRat (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I crack jokes without references. When I make an attempt to answer a question, I damn sure back it up with actual references. See also Whataboutism for your particular problem here. Finding minor problems in other people does not excuse you from more serious problems. --Jayron32 01:56, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm not buying that "oysters and clams are most often cooked alive" is meant as a joke, or that most of your other unreferenced responses are. StuRat (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

That's an overreaction. This question is definitely answerable - as I'm about to demonstrate. SteveBaker (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The American Society of Training and Documentation claims[1] that the total amount of knowledge is currently doubling every 10 years - but that the half-life of knowledge (the amount of time before it becomes obsolete) is also shrinking...they don't provide a number for that...but one presumes it's considerably less than 10 years. This is kinda backed up by Nature magazine [2] that provides the hard information that the amount of scientific knowledge doubles every nine years. What's surprising about that is that the world population is only doubling every 40 or so years - so each person must be generating and storing knowledge at an increasing rate. However, population growth must soon level out (by one means or another) - and that may place a far lower cap on the rate of knowledge growth.

On the other hand, "knowledge" is a fairly fuzzy term. For example, Walmart is claimed to be retaining the information about every single item a person buys with a credit card in a store. Is this "knowledge"? As in "I know that a person named Steve Baker bought a 24 pack of Diet Coke at 10:35am in Manor Texas on 27th April 2015 and went through checkout number 7 and therefore must have been standing at latitude blah,blah,blah, longitude blah,blah at that time". It's easy to claim that it's NOT knowledge - but merely data - but suppose someone 100 years from now is writing my biography (unlikely!) then they would easily be able to ascertain an awful lot about me and turn that into a book that you'd have to say constituted "knowledge"...and the knowledge of my location and purchasing habits is building up at a phenomenal rate.

So if very mundane data counts as knowledge then our ability to store that data on computers instead of on paper will massively increase the rate of knowledge retention...but in terms of actual useful results - that may not deliver much in the way of improvement in our overall understanding of the universe. But Nature's claim is that the number of scientific papers that are referenced by other scientific papers (some kind of a measure of "usefulness") is doubling every 9 years - and that is more likely to be useful knowledge than the mere rote memorization of trivia on some computer someplace.

SteveBaker (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, Steve. Much information/knowledge in the future will be quite trivial and stored externally, such as on computers. For example, we seem to rapidly be approaching a situation where your location (well, your cell phone's location) will be tracked and stored 24/7. This could be helpful for police, but the loss of privacy is frightening. StuRat (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Does thiscome under the word 'opinion' as Jayron stated? Beside, what Jayron stated, if I understand properly, shouldn't it be stated to the questionnaire rather than to Stu (who used his time to answer a question in order to satisfy the questionnaire)? However, I could be wrong... -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

VGrigas (WMF): Seeking easy lifestyle, quick money and sex, no learning, testing, only documenting and archiving, using mechanisms ('knowledge' word wise, a reading pen, a bot talker for word...)... -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

• You are confusing data with knowledge. Knowing how to get to the Moon is knowledge. The telemetry of the moon shots is data. μηδείς (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Me? Apology if so! -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 21:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

That was a you pl., and I didn't indent under your comment, I bulleted the thread. μηδείς (talk) 02:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

My mistake, sorry. What's a you pl. anyway? -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:48, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

It might continue to increase, but there's no guarantee. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Noticed that there is a capital K at "knowledge" in the original question? I think the first answer by StuRat is a better understanding of the original poster's question. It is one good use of an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia can indeed be a means to think. An encyclopedia can be a good base for thinking. The OP was thinking, and he was asking a question that was thinking. In my opinion, correct answer should not be to turn him off to "the rest of the internet because here at Wikipedia we don't think we just collect references". The reference link StuRat should have provided in his first answer, should have been a link to Wikipedia home page. What I mean is Knowledge (with a capital K) does not live without thinking. If we act like robots, if we don't think, then the answer to the original question is undoubtedly "Knowledge has no future and will soon disappear, since it is being killed, and quickly, by a tendency to function in a non-thinking robot way. Akseli9 (talk) 04:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

References

Stadtwurst?

I am going to Munich, Bavaria, Germany, in about a month. I'd like to try authentic Bavarian cuisine there. I already know of the restaurant "Bratwurst Glöckl" right next to the Frauenkirche in central Munich. There is a dish there consisting of bratwursts, "Stadtwurst", "Käsekrainer", sauerkraut and mustard. I have eaten authentic Bavarian bratwursts and sauerkraut and liked them very much. But I have never eaten the other two sausages. Wikipedia has an article about the Kranjska klobasa, which says the Käsekrainer is similar, but with cheese added, which sounds nice. But what is "Stadtwurst"? The menu says they serve "Münchner Stadtwurst". What kind of sausage is it like? I have tried "Milzwurst" - spleen sausage - in Munich and didn't particularly like it. The Bavarian Weißwurst even looks repulsive. Is "Münchner Stadtwurst" anything like them or like bratwurst? JIP | Talk 18:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Not a direct answer, but foods which are repulsive in large quantities can often be tasty in small quantities, blended in with other foods. StuRat (talk) 18:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

• I'd highly recommend Schnitzel mit Spaetzle, although it is not specifically Bavarian, but it is typically Bavarian. If you don't want veal, see if you can get a substitute like chicken, but don't skip the Spaetzle. I can't recommend any specific restaurants, since I was there 30 years ago, but I'd avoid the beer halls unless you are in a group of 4 or more, otherwise it's kind of like bowling on your own. If you like dark beer, ask for DAB Alt, although DAB went bankrupt, so I am not sure if they are still in business (they stopped exporting to the US some time ago. There's always the Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte which is local and world-famous.

And this (important) is ein typisches bayerisches Restaurant you will specifically want to avoid.

μηδείς (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. "Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte" is not local to Bavaria but to the Black Forest, just as the English name, Black Forest cake, suggests.--TMCk (talk) 22:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

If it's supposed to be typically Bavarian, why are they speaking with French terms? Anyway, sausages are my primary option so far, that's why I'm asking. But it's not set in stone yet. I could change my mind still. I've been to the Münchner Hofbräuhaus on my own, with no problems. But that was during the middle of the day and I didn't actually drink any alcohol there. I should be fine as long as I avoid the largest beer halls at the middle of the night. JIP | Talk 20:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

French terms? Like Jenseits von Gut und Boese? (I am confused.) In any case, I didn't mean you'd have a problem in the beer halls, just that they would be boring if you didn't have at least a quartet of singers to enjoy them with. μηδείς (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I see the soup is à la clown and the host calls the guests monsieur (twice) and madame (once), but that is typical cosmopolitan vocabulary and less than 1% of the Auslaenderwarnung Video. μηδείς (talk) 22:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte has taken over most of Germany, but is local to the Black Forest area in Baden Württemberg, not Bavaria. And DAB Alt is made by the "Dortmunder Aktien Brauerei", which is, somewhat surprising, in Dortmund, which is in the Ruhr area (very much not Bavaria). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly won't contradict Stephan, but one should still have both while in Germany. In America, if you ask a New Yorker what to have, he'll tell you they have the best pizza and subs, which is pure nonsense, you will get better in Philly. In New York you either want a hotdog from a street cart (if you are not weak of stomach) or a sandwich at a Jewish Deli. Junior's in Brooklyn is great for everything, especially their brisket and their cheesecake. And City Island is expensive and isolated, but it has the best seafood outside Maryland and New England. I'll stand by my recommendations as an American tourist, but gladly acknowledge the superior knowledge of the natives. PS. I understand DAB is cheap in Germany from our article, but I still have never had any dark beer of any sort better than DAB Alt. μηδείς (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Agree about trying a lot of different things. But for beer, in Bavaria you really want to try the local varieties, of which there are plenty, and plenty good ones. Most of the major breweries have beer gardens in Munich, but the real find are the smaller ones around the city. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The German Wikipedia has an article at de:Stadtwurst if any German speakers wish to translate. Nanonic (talk) 20:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I am too lazy to give a complete translation, also because I know JIP reads German, but summarizing from that article: It's a type of Brühwurst from Franconian and Upper Palatine Cuisine composed of ground pork and often also beef along with finely chopped pork, marjoram, and fresh back bacon, all stuffed in a pig's intestine. Then there are varieties, including Stadtwurst mit Musik ("Stadtwurst with music"), a dish of sliced Stadtwurst with vinegar, oil, pepper, and onions. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I have started Stadtwurst, yet one more of my of my tiny but well-referenced stubs.

"de:wikipedia" laudably rejects "fair use" images, and only uses pictures that are fully free. Props to them. From my purely anecdotal experience translating articles de -> en, there is somewhat of a lack of citing sources over there.

That said, it probably goes both ways. And is no doubt a problem on all the Wikipedias.

--Shirt58 (talk) 12:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• We have an article about Bavarian food. I'd recommend eating at a Biergarten if season has started. As for the dishes, Spaetzle are common but Knödel (2 kinds off: 1 made with potatoes and the other with bread crumbs) are far more typical. For (late) breakfast Weisswurst with Brezeln (the real tasty soft kind you'd never find in the US or else) is a "must try" and so is a Schweinshaxn. Just ask locals (not the tourists) for further food recommendations.
  There is a place called "Schlachthof" that has a Wirtshaus with beer garden + a hall for cultural events. Tho I don't know how much it changed since the last time I was there, I highly recommend it for food and atmosphere; And you won't find noisy drunk tourists/locals in there ;)
  It's located at: Zenettistr. 9 in München.--TMCk (talk) 22:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  BTW, a "Stadtwurst" is not a typical food in Munich and the (wide) area around as per the German article and to my own knowledge.--TMCk (talk) 22:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Bavarian dishes are more or less repulsive, nevertheless you might wish to see some at List of Bavarian dishes (in Bavarian language) and more at Category:Cuisine of Bavaria. --Stuhlsasse (talk) 10:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

If you are going to have a beer in Munich, you should have what is called a Weißbier there (Hefeweizen in northern Germany), which is a typically Bavarian beer. Augustinerbräu is considered by many to be the best brewery in Munich, so if you want local flavor, try an Augustiner instead of DAB. Beware that the Weißbier is quite strong (but also quite tasty). Also, I would not limit myself to Wurst. By all means try a Wurst or two, but there is more to Bavarian cuisine than sausage. Stuhlsasse's article is a fair guide. I am guessing that Stuhlsasse is from someplace other than Bavaria; I did not find the food there repulsive. Marco polo (talk) 18:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Stepping away from the sausages for a moment, it looks like you'll be in town for Spargelzeit ("asparagus time"). From about mid-April is a celebration of the beginning of the asparagus season; you'll find a lot of restaurants will offer special Spargel menus or options. Take a stroll through the Viktualienmarkt, too. It has farmers' market roots, but now boasts a tremendous assortment of fresh and prepared foods. Not all of German cuisine is beer, potatoes, and sausages! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)