• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1516 months ago

    A freely accessible collection of human knowledge? Of course authoritarians hate it. An informed populace is their enemy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      126 months ago

      All under the guise of “free speech”. Which, as we all know, means speech that align with Elon’s currently held opinions.

  • shoulderoforion
    link
    fedilink
    866 months ago

    Just made my donation to Wikipedia, never have before, this news is as good a prompt as I could have ever received Fuck Elon Musk

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The claim about the budget is true.

    Source.

    A Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told Newsweek in an email that the chart’s equity section “refers to making it possible for more people to share reliable knowledge on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects.”

    The email continues: “Wikipedia is built on the premise that it becomes better when more people of different backgrounds—including political persuasions—source, edit, curate and research content. Our equity goal advances that. The ‘Safety & Inclusion’ goal (now titled ‘Safety & Integrity’ in our 2024-2025 plan) is focused on ensuring that people are able to freely access and safely contribute to knowledge on Wikipedia in a changing legal and policy environment globally.”

    The spokesperson continued: “The goal centers on legal efforts that protect free expression, prevent censorship and advocate for laws and regulations that keep Wikipedia accessible for all to use.”

    I don’t think that’s where a lot of donors (especially but not exclusively conservative donors) want their money going, and I don’t think Wikipedia’s donation requests would lead these donors to realize that that’s where some of their money would be going.

    Where your donation goes

    Technology: Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development. Wikipedia is one of the top 10 websites in the world, and it runs on a fraction of what other top websites spend.

    People and Projects: The other top websites have thousands of employees. Wikimedia Foundation has about 700 staff and contractors to support a wide variety of projects, making your donation a great investment in a highly-efficient not-for-profit organization.

    Source.

    I suppose that “People and Projects” is vague enough that it isn’t false, but I was certainly surprised when I saw the actual budget allocation.

    Edit: I accidentally posted this with an image from an episode of the Simpsons instead of the chart I meant to post. Please disregard that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      126 months ago

      Your donation goes towards running Wikipedia. There’s a blurb for pitching that, with a few details, but if you want everything, you gave to go to another page and read it? That all sounds exactly like what I’d expect from a banner ad seeking donations for a website

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26 months ago

        I assume that employee salaries are included in the category that corresponds to the work that they do.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      476 months ago

      I don’t think that’s where a lot of donors (especially but not exclusively conservative donors) want their money going, and I don’t think Wikipedia’s donation requests would lead people to understand that that’s where some of their money would be going.

      Why are you trying to frame this as if wikipedia was lying on where their funding goes when your own source is their own transparency article?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        They’re not lying but they’re being misleading. Everyone who donates sees the donation page, but it’s reasonable to assume that almost all of those donors don’t read the “Wikimedia Foundation Annual Plan/2023-2024/Finance” page.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I don’t think that’s where a lot of donors (especially but not exclusively conservative donors) want their money going

      You don’t think people want to access Wikipedia safely and securely or guarantee an egalitarian sourcing of information?

      I was certainly surprised when I saw the actual budget allocation.

      “I didn’t know how a public-facing non-profit catalogue of information spent its money. Now I do. And I hate it.”

      shrug

      Why do people think their own personal ignorance is an indictment?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    176 months ago

    Never donated to Wikipedia in my life, but now I do, and its monthly. It’s not much, but it’s honestly work.

  • Allah
    link
    fedilink
    196 months ago

    this guy is really good at making enemies

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      He’s a vulture capitalist. Very good at finding ways to cannibalize a nice public thing for the benefit of a handful of private malicious actors.

      That’s always going to make enemies. But so what? You’re a vulture. You can always pick up and leave today, then find another wounded animal to prey on tomorrow.

  • IninewCrow
    link
    fedilink
    English
    366 months ago

    Reminds me to donate to Wikipedia … and download another updated copy of the entire Wikipedia database.

        • IninewCrow
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I’ve only ever used Kiwix … it’s the easiest and most easily installable on different devices.

          I’ve downloaded the entire database about six times now over the past few years. I keep a duplicated copy everywhere … laptop, tablet, storage drive, portable drive, smartphone … in multiple places at home / cottage / relatives place

          My latest download will only be to have an updated copy as my last one is about a year old.

          I don’t like doomsday prepping and I don’t really prepare for anything. I’ve been self sufficient all my life and if the world ends, I’ll be able to make do on my own, I always have. But when it comes to knowledge and information, keeping a copy of Wikipedia is no-brainer for me.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            26 months ago

            I’m not the prepper person either, but I like to be self-sufficient and not be overly reliant on modern technology. My primary use case has been during travels.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      I’d like to see how much of an uptick in these they’ve gotten lately. I’m gonna do this myself