Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#251

Post by nailer »

clipsy wrote: post #65
nailer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding the missing topics mentioned in the article (updated to quote them for convenience): The Barack Obama article completely fails to mention many well-known scandals: Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the AP phone records scandal, and Fast and Furious, to say nothing of Solyndra or the Hillary Clinton email server scandal—or, of course, the developing “Obamagate” story in which Obama was personally involved in survei…

Have you bothered to do any sort of comparison as to how similar attacks are reported? At a quick glance, I see nothing on George W Bush's wiki page[0] about the 2002 consulate attack in Kolkata[1], for example. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_attack_on_American_cultur...

How is that remotely similar? There was not a scandal implicating George Bush regarding the Kolkhata attack.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#252

Post by acdha »

ty6853 wrote: post #132
adipose wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give particular examples of the particular worldview that they are trying to push?

As soon as Harris ran for POTUS they edited out that her dad was characterized as a Marxist scholar and then viciously defended any attempt to re-instate it.

More accurately, they rejected the wave of people who tried to add that single word to characterize of his entire career but were not otherwise contributing anything to the article. There’s a good discussion here highlighting how they were looking for substantial improvements by people who were actually familiar with his work, not just trying to affix a label to someone they were otherwise unfamiliar with.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rhododendrites#Don...

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#253

Post by bawolff »

tintor wrote: post #144

Wikipedia needs decentralized hosting infra, away from any single country. It is way too important.

Decentralization typically means instead of being subject to one crazy government you are subject to multiple and have to deal with all.

I think wikipedia's approach of centralizing in one place but allowing downloading backups and making all sourcecode and server config public is better. If the worst happens anyone can setup a fork.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#255

Post by Tycho »

acdha wrote: post #232
Tycho wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Citation needed for anything on the scale we’ve seen - for example, the topic of this discussion is a non-profit having their status threatened for non-specific reasons which appear to be constitutionally-protected speech. If it’s “fairly obvious”, you should have no trouble providing examples of something equivalent to this legal threat.

I recall right-leaning social media sites like Gab, Parler, r/TheDonald, Infowars being taken offline.

I can’t read the WP article because it’s paywalled, however I have been suspicious of Wikimedia for a long time. I used to donate to them thinking I was helping to keep the severs running, then being alarmed to find the money was going on all sorts of nonsense. The former CEO (Maher) was blatantly a political/intelligence operator. Fits the pattern of the establishment/powers-that-be abusing the NGO/non-profit sector to illicitly further their aims, so I’m not surprised the new DoJ are looking into them.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#256

Post by sapphicsnail »

edgyquant wrote: post #245
sapphicsnail wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can someone talk about democracy peaking when the franchise was extended to a tiny minority of the population. You don't give a damn about individual liberties, you only care that the "right" people have liberty.

That poster is specifically arguing against democracy

Your right. I stand corrected. They don't give a damn about democracy or individual liberties.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#257

Post by ks2048 »

sandspar wrote: post #198
ks2048 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR is left {{Citation needed}} [1] [1] outside of identity politics

This will sound rude but I mean it respectfully. If you believe NPR is not left leaning then you are in a severe filter bubble and may want to update your news diet.

Point taken, but I think my comment is a reflection of the problems with the modern use of "left" and "right".

Yes, of course NPR is more on the side of democrats than republicans.

But, it is very much pro-business, and often pro-war status quo ("right"). And, as I mentioned ("identity politics"), also very much pro-diversity in race/gender/etc. ("left").

So, IMHO, very much "centrist", not "left" (except on race/sex/gender).

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#258

Post by dewey »

tintor wrote: post #144

Wikipedia needs decentralized hosting infra, away from any single country. It is way too important.

The hosting isn’t important, it’s easy to move or have an offline copy already. The access to fundraising is much more important and more complicated.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#259

Post by riffraff »

nntwozz wrote: post #235
rchaud wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. The general election in 2022 had 84,2% of eligible voters in Sweden.

Italy had 64% for the parliamentary elections in 2022, which is the lowest ever but it's pretty far from 30%.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#260

Post by dxroshan »

mjrpes wrote: post #56

Here's the letter: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ocNyx34Et19sKtlta0bTPPzSPcp... No claims, no evidence. No sources, except "it has come to my attention" and "information received by my office".

What is happening is very scary. Many people don't seem to care about any evidence or sources. They blindly follow whatever lies that their leaders say. I think this has been the case at anytime in history. However, now, with the internet, it is easy to spread such lies to mass and easy for such leaders to make blind followers.
Post reply on HN