161–168 of 168 posts
Why Wikipedia though? Wikidata should be one to get this kind of data and all Wikipedia articles has Wikidata items. On top of that Wikidata even keep records of site name, like when someone change their site name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your app was probably taken down because you apparently don’t understand what a trademark is, or what it is for. > Wikipedia's asshole lawyers didn't like that I used a serifed W in the logo It’s not the lawyers which don’t like it. Trademark exists to protect consumer confusion . If a reasonable person could reasonably (but incorrectly) believe that your app was officially associated with Wikipedia based on only loo…
Here’s my app’s logo: https://github.com/GarrettAlbright/wptrans/blob/master/Icon%... Note that it does not use the same colors as the Wikipedia logo or the same puzzle piece/globe iconography. It uses a serifed “W” as well as characters from other writing systems, with a brown and yellow color scheme - alluding to Wikipedia as well as the app’s purpose, but intentionally avoiding copying to a degree that would cause…
Wikipedia editors have noticed that people use wikipedia for this purpose (finding the current location of sites) and so they have started to censor links for sites they don't want to encourage people to access. Right now this mostly impacts sites few would condone, like 8chan or kiwifarms. But in theory the policy applies to any site with illegal material so places like the pirate bay or scihub could have their link…
Here's a well-reasoned argument linked from that thread for keeping extremist URL in articles about extremist websites. Strange what can change in just a couple of years. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(poli...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As things stand Wikipedia is pretty good. Non-contentious topics are free to edit by everyone, contentious/political/hotbutton/etc topics have restricted editorship. I do not sense any specific bias. As usual, "freedom of speech" does not imply a right to be listened to. Also, I do not buy this dystopia claim. In 99.99% of all topics we know exactly what is true and what is not. The sky is blue, clouds are condensed…
This is the style of thinking that is drilled into children from a young age. No one has ever discovered anything, mankind has not continually rediscovered the world and then forged dogmas and killed dissenters and then burned the dogmas and killed the priests of the former dogma. There is Capital T Truth and Capital F Factx. No one is responsible for those factx, they just exist and are delivered by God into the min…
We'll follow the scientific method; and that is how we learn and continue to explore and learn more.
Do really not a see a difference between that and convenient political alternate facts?
And the grey sky? Seriously? You're looking at clouds, not the sky. Whatever, why am I even responding...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I don't know is, I see mainstream media become increasingly curated and clearly agenda driven. Is this a function of reality or me getting better at spotting it? I felt as though in the 90s CNN legitimately was a good news source. Early 21centuey VICE was legitimately good. Today there is next to nothing given anything other than a heavily biased view. I think the internet has made things worse, there's a new ki…
> I felt as though in the 90s CNN legitimately was a good news source. Nope. They were the original cheerleaders of modern militarism, from the first Persian Gulf War, which they turned into an infotainment spectacle devoid of any serious critical analysis, to their promotion of NAFTA and neo-liberalism. This idea that things were better in the past is a form of rosy retrospection and nostalgia. Things weren’t better…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguably the onion URL is information of value, but someone who can't figure out what the URL for 8chan might be probably doesn't need to go there anyway.
Quoted post unavailable.
Bad information is like viruses. Right?. So what we need is an immune-system. Bad information will still be there but it is prevented (to an extent) from multiplying. What would an immune-system for online information look like?
How do you define “bad” information? I found a list of CSAM sites via a link in a Wikipedia book about onion services- having a known evil target to practice getting a dot onion to reveal its ip was both good and bad data, depending on who you ask. (The CFAA has since expired, and those rude little pedophiles DEFINITELY noticed me.)
Note that "wrong" information is not bad as such, it is just wrong. It can be corrected. It becomes bad when its purpose is to mislead people, in which case its originators will never want to correct it.
We live in a distopia where one of the last search engines that returns real results related to anything the western mainstream "hidden forces" do not want you to be able to see is Yandex, a company located under a dictatorship. In 2022, the only way for a regular citizen to approximate what is reality, what is the "truth", is to look for information provided from the opposite side of any argument you're trying to un…