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

Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 464 posts

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#251

Post by GaryBluto »

bawolff wrote: post #187
dns_snek wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Conservapedia This is the first time I've heard about it. Is that meant to be a satire website? I can't tell anymore.

No, it was a fork from like a decade ago. https://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page It started out crazy but it only got crazier as time went on. The biggest problem with wikipedia competitors, is the only people who tend to put in effort to make one are usually crazy.

I notice this with a lot of projects/communities. The only people who tend to create change are usually eccentric.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#252

Post by bee_rider »

incompatible wrote: post #231
irjustin wrote: post #3

I'll go out on a limb and say we _need_ Wikipedia and it's okay that traffic falls. Physical print encyclopedias got replaced by Wikipedia, but AI isn't a replacement (can't ever see how either). While AI is a method of easier access for the end user, the purpose of Wikipedia stands on its own. I've always scoffed at the Wikimedia Foundation's warchest and continuously increasing annual spending. I say now is the tim…

The Wikimedia Foundation is unlikely to last for 1000 years as an organisation because it doesn't exist within a social / economic system that will last for 1000 years. The US government is already actively plotting against it. Sure, they can try hopping from one country to another, but it won't be sustainable for that long. It's not even certain if Wikipedia itself can exist for such a long period, given fragility o…

Wikipedia seems like a pretty good candidate for a seed vault style “let’s make sure this gets really backed up” type project.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#254

Post by dvsfish »

tines wrote: post #107
FranzFerdiNaN wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia is fine. Bias cant be avoided, only made explicit, and the fact that you think it can means you should probably move to Conservapedia or whatever slop Musk will release.

> Bias cant be avoided, only made explicit This is so untrue and this is a harmful belief. And I'm pretty much as liberal as they come.

I get the sentiment of what you're saying, but I don’t think that’s totally fair to the parent. Biases aren’t automatically "bad" or "failings". they’re akin to heuristics, and it’s practically impossible to eliminate them entirely. For example, we’re all here talking about how we should treat Wikipedia with skepticism. That's a sort of "neutral" bias that doesn't conjure a strong emotion, and is perhaps more acceptable for it, and probably leads to better informational hygiene overall.

In fact, the claim that “bias can be avoided and should be absolutely”, that is implicit in your resposne reflects a bias of its own: a bias toward moral or intellectual purity, as if the parent recognizing bias is equivalent to endorsing it. I get that this is a pedantic point to make but to come at the parent with such vigour for being realistic, again seems a bit unfair

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#255

Post by SchemaLoad »

bee_rider wrote: post #252
incompatible wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Wikimedia Foundation is unlikely to last for 1000 years as an organisation because it doesn't exist within a social / economic system that will last for 1000 years. The US government is already actively plotting against it. Sure, they can try hopping from one country to another, but it won't be sustainable for that long. It's not even certain if Wikipedia itself can exist for such a long period, given fragility o…

Wikipedia seems like a pretty good candidate for a seed vault style “let’s make sure this gets really backed up” type project.

There are a million backups of wikipedia. That's not the main issue, it's the future of the project. If the main org goes down, there will be a million forks of it where none of them have the same legitimacy of the original, edits will die off, views will die off, and the content will become increasingly stale and vandalised.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#256

Post by SchemaLoad »

epolanski wrote: post #138
irjustin wrote: post #3

I'll go out on a limb and say we _need_ Wikipedia and it's okay that traffic falls. Physical print encyclopedias got replaced by Wikipedia, but AI isn't a replacement (can't ever see how either). While AI is a method of easier access for the end user, the purpose of Wikipedia stands on its own. I've always scoffed at the Wikimedia Foundation's warchest and continuously increasing annual spending. I say now is the tim…

Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information.

Have you actually tried editing wikipedia? It's extremely difficult to get anything approved. You have to provide multiple credible sources for things or else the mods just revert/delete your page.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#257

Post by bee_rider »

nobodywillobsrv wrote: post #196
peab wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what topics did you make contributions to? From what I understand, it's mostly political and/or controversial topics that have this issue.

I've had tax stuff reverted even. eventually was allowed I think. Wikipedia has problems.

I guess you picked “tax stuff” because the tax related thing you edited was a sort of dry tax related topic, but I’m sure we could find lots of controversial topics under the “tax stuff” umbrella.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#258

Post by SchemaLoad »

andersa wrote: post #137
NewsaHackO wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I misssing something or is Wikipedia net positive 200M? If this is true, that's eye opening. Weird given how much they beg for money on every article.

The amount of money moving through Wikipedia is absolutely mind blowing, and next to none of that is even being used to sustain the site. Hope those still donating to it feel smart about what they're supporting...

Still a drop in the bucket compared to the money going in to AI companies off the back of wikipedia data.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#259

Post by parineum »

incompatible wrote: post #231
irjustin wrote: post #3

I'll go out on a limb and say we _need_ Wikipedia and it's okay that traffic falls. Physical print encyclopedias got replaced by Wikipedia, but AI isn't a replacement (can't ever see how either). While AI is a method of easier access for the end user, the purpose of Wikipedia stands on its own. I've always scoffed at the Wikimedia Foundation's warchest and continuously increasing annual spending. I say now is the tim…

The Wikimedia Foundation is unlikely to last for 1000 years as an organisation because it doesn't exist within a social / economic system that will last for 1000 years. The US government is already actively plotting against it. Sure, they can try hopping from one country to another, but it won't be sustainable for that long. It's not even certain if Wikipedia itself can exist for such a long period, given fragility o…

> The US government is already actively plotting against it.

If we're going to take the actions of a couple of low level dope legislatures as, "the US government" and a toothless investigation as "actively plotting against", sure.

Re: Wikipedia says traffic is falling due to AI search summaries and social video

#260

Post by boringg »

itishappy wrote: post #218
boringg wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much data does wikipedia take up?

25.60 GB https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data_dump_torrents#English_W...

Wow they could easily maintain that for infinity at a low cost (less inflation and you know upkeep).
Post reply on HN