This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Free and open version of TED.com
Hi all,
In light of TED's recent decision to remove videos that question scientism, I know some of us are thinking that we can't trust TED, or any closed organization, to spread bold and innovative ideas. Some of us are thinking about a free and open platform for doing the same.
Are people interested in the idea of a website to host short user-generated videos describing whatever ideas the speaker thinks are worth sharing?
TED's 18-minute video format has been very successful. So has its diversity of topics, from every branch of science, art, social engagement and personal experience. This could be kept intact.
Quality control is obviously an issue here - I would love to hear some suggestions about how other open-content projects have dealt with that.
Bandwidth would not be a huge issue, as the videos could be uploaded to Youtube and embedded.
The website would need to attract some big names to get the ball rolling - any ideas about how to do this would be welcome.
What do you think?
Barry Palmer 50+
The core issue is quality.
If you want complete openness, you will not get high quality, by any definition of quality.
Perhaps other sites will be similar to TED, but have talks of varying length and choose talks based on different criteria. Perhaps the curators will be a board of scientists, or perhaps a board of philosophers, or maybe journalists. Some will be more open and some will be more stringent.
Let the competition commence. The global village will be the winner.
Conor O'Higgins 20+
Isn't this disproven by Wikipedia, Linux, Firefox etc?
edward long 100+
Conor O'Higgins 20+
Aja Bogdanoff 20+
The kudos are much appreciated, though. :)
edward long 100+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Ed Schulte 50+
From what I have been able to tell BBC has picked up on this skirmish since they already have their own ideas program and are attempting (aggressively) to establish their British "style" not only at home but overseas eg N A and not just a one hour news on PBS. So something to watch for.
This is good in that they will not have the Cult behaviour TED talks relies on ...charging $7,500 per weekend to applaud on que to speakers who undergone group indoctrination ....plus BBC will have ready access to truly open but informed people who can set and maintain standards....and hold forums in global location. They can (perhaps) also use the audience vote by "push the button yes/no" method as they use in the Middle east forums.
I am beginning to sound like I am selling BBC here but anyway....lets remember TED is just TED and if people want to think they are "heart thinkers" by buying into it ...so be it!!! But in the meantime there is potential through these communications systems to create a true vehicle of thought/info/ideas/creativity. Some more then something somewhere between National Geographic and Readers Digest paid for with "1970's Dare to be Great cultism"
At least TED's existence has shown that there is potential out there...now of a smart broad caster ( lets face it, this does cost $$$) can pull together creative people / put on Open to ALL thoughts / connected to Moderated feedback / backed up by adequate background reading and related info / and provide it globally / then TED would have actually contributed to "making a difference," oddly as it may seem.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
george lockwood 20+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I am not sure what you mean by quality control, as quality is to many people in the eye of the beholder. How do you see "open" and "quality control" to be related? This is confusing to me. Are you familiar with Ignite? Ignite has in common with TED the idea of its consisting of live gatherings in different places that are then recorded. I think anyone can sign up to present but that the time limit is 5 minutes.
george lockwood 20+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Conor O'Higgins 20+
Yes, but focused on talks/presentations expressing particular ideas.
"How do you see "open" and "quality control" to be related? This is confusing to me."
Not just to you! This tension exists in all open-source and open-content projects. Wikipedia seems to do alright by letting users weed out bad content, and having moderators lock down controversial content.
Some sort of voting system (thumbs up / thumbs down) is one obvious way.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I don't think thumbs up/thumbs down is a reliable way of assessing "quality" of content, though it can identify the popularity of the speaker, his organization, and his ideas.