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

391–400 of 1001 posts

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

#391

Post by IceHegel »

Curtis Yarvin has a riff that goes something like this: Liberal Wikipedia, Communist Wikipedia, and Fascist Wikipedia will all actually agree on the vast majority of topics: Physics, botany, the solar system, chemistry, math, statistics etc.

However they'll be worlds apart on history, economics, anthropology, sexuality, politics, previous leaders and so on.

Our Wikipedia is the world seen through the eyes of the New York Times + Harvard. Our Wikipedia is probably correct about Physics, botany...

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

#392

Post by otherme123 »

kristopolous wrote: post #194
NelsonMinar wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Martin was also at the coup attempt on Jan 6 and on that day said "Like Mardi Gras in DC today: love, faith and joy. Ignore #FakeNews". https://archive.ph/jekzQ

[flagged]

It's not too difficult to draw connections between Wikileaks, Assange, RT and Russian government. It's known that the GRU funneled info to Wikileaks many times, and at the same time they never published anything that could seriously affect Putin. Examples: the Dirt on opponents were published by UK newspapers. The Fancy Bear papers were published by hacker groups and online news. Pandora Papers by the ICIJ.

The only leak than contains something barely close to Putin and was published on Wikileaks were the Panama Papers, that names three friends of him, not in the government. The lack of any russian officials in those papers speaks volumes.

Best case scenario, they are tools. Worse case, they are assets.

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

#393

Post by chii »

roenxi wrote: post #375
NelsonMinar wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RT is not legit. It is Russian propaganda. When those people participated they were collaborators.

Ex-CIA head Brennan famously remarked in an MSNBC interview [0] that when he says something is a Russian information operation that includes dumping accurate information. So really it isn't enough to identify something as Russian propaganda - it is necessary to analyse whether it is propaganda of the accurate and informative variety, or the inaccurate variety. Propaganda really just means someone is arguing a viewpoi…

> a lot of the views are very agreeable

That's why you don't "ignore" propaganda, but consume all, from all sides. Just consuming agreeable propaganda simply means it is working.

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

#394

Post by psychoslave »

watwut wrote: post #376
alephnan wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same can be said of boardroom politics and board of directors. Or investment circles such as tech venture capital

They don't have principles.

Even "maximize the hegemonic monopolistic power of my claws" can be taken as mindset principles.

Having principles is orthogonal to striving adoption of ethical fair well being for everyone.

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

#395

Post by ellen364 »

sgc wrote: post #323
mulmen wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s also no evidence that increased turnout would have had the same result. What seems to be overlooked in these conversations is the skill with which American voters have been disenfranchised by partisan forces. It’s easy to blame people for not voting if you ignore the real difficulties in actually casting a vote for many Americans.

That an enormous sample size. Statistically a complete participation should be very close, so the burden of proof lies with those who claim it would be different. Regardless of whether Trump would have won or not, that is a clear indication of evenly split public sentiment. So we still get to justly reap the fruits of our collective choices. There is no exoneration by whimsically dreaming of improbable alternatives.…

The electorate self-selected into voters and non-voters, it wasn't a random sample. Some chose to go to the polls and some chose to stay at home. Voter preferences don't say a lot about the preferences of non-voters, who've already shown they choose differently.

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

#396

Post by chii »

gonzobonzo wrote: post #229
bjourne wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew IceWhiz. You are correct that he (or rather "they") eventually was kicked from the site. But he/they operated on the site for years and was the biggest PITA you can imagine. He must have single-handedly scared away two dozen honest contributors with his BS. It is very, very easy to game the rules on Wikipedia. Wars of attrition goes on for years. Normal people don't waste their time. IceWhiz and his meat puppe…

Right. The fact that someone so terrible got 99% approval and only one anonymous investigator was able to stop them makes me think that it's likely a lot of other terrible admins who didn't have an anonymous investigator go after them probably go through the process. And the times I've brought up the fact that Wikipedia can be unreliable before, I've had numerous editors come in and claim that wasn't true and that pe…

I wonder if there's room in using AI to gather past edits of someone, as part of vetting, and use the sentiment analysis to check how neutral their biases are.

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

#397

Post by Cthulhu_ »

r053bud wrote: post #109
tzs wrote: post #69

> Before being named U.S. attorney, Martin appeared on Russia-backed media networks more than 150 times, The Washington Post reported last week. In one appearance on RT in 2022, he said there was no evidence of military buildup on Ukraine’s boarders only nine days before Russia invaded the country. He further criticized U.S. officials as warmongering and ignoring Russia security concerns. This is getting ridiculous.…

We voted for this! This is “democracy” at work

Sure, but you also voted for a system of checks & balances, laws, and separation of powers - whatever happened to all these laws and stuff from the Cold War where even a hint that you may have ties to Russia would get you a Visit?

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

#398

Post by jay_kyburz »

kurtreed2 wrote: post #128
jay_kyburz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would really like to read some concrete examples.

As a start you can look at the following page. https://www.reddit.com/r/WatchWikipediaDie/wiki/scandals

Thnaks.

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

#399

Post by dayvigo »

Tycho wrote: post #215
sgnelson wrote: post #197

Serious question, after the past few months, how can anyone deny that America is heading in a totalitarian direction? Those of you who believe that all of the many actions that have happened in the past few weeks are "okay", please explain your perspective without resorting to "whataboutism" or cherry picking only one or two of the things that have occurred lately. Because from what I'm sitting, this is not behavior…

[flagged]

Conservatives are the most prominent and dangerous de-bankers. It is well known that Mormons have a lot of power the payment processor world, and censor content they find offensive to their religion, using concerns about fraud and chargebacks as mere convenient excuses.

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

#400

Post by IceHegel »

Tycho wrote: post #215
sgnelson wrote: post #197

Serious question, after the past few months, how can anyone deny that America is heading in a totalitarian direction? Those of you who believe that all of the many actions that have happened in the past few weeks are "okay", please explain your perspective without resorting to "whataboutism" or cherry picking only one or two of the things that have occurred lately. Because from what I'm sitting, this is not behavior…

[flagged]

Yeah, it's pretty clear that Democrats (as they are) are getting fed into the woodchipper.

They became too petty and no longer served their purpose as the political party of the ruling class, oligarchy turned. Hell of a way to go out though.

Post reply on HN