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

Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

meta.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 401 posts

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#321

Post by ea550ff70a »

robonerd wrote: post #269

In response to these kind of stories, the comment sections online are always filled with crypto advocates upset about the organization not taking their money. This really makes clear who needs who. Crypto needs wikipedia much more than wikipedia needs crypto. Wikipedia is not hard up for cash (if you earnestly believe their begging ads, you must be naive. Give me a break.) But crypto is hard up for legitimacy.

> if you earnestly believe their begging ads, you must be naive. Give me a break.

wow you are such an enlightened individual aren't you? Give me a break.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#322

Post by RedBeetDeadpool »

RedBeetDeadpool wrote: post #293
mardifoufs wrote: post #37

Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a platform for pump and dumps. Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. This 100% reminds me of the almost cultist like extremely negative reaction to anythi…

Its because wikipedia has been taken over by the same types that most other big tech companies have been taken over by. Just look at anything political and you'll realize they have for the most part won the war on information and are dutifully silencing and censoring and disagreeing thoughts or facts. The website is not as neutral as it was in its heyday, and that reflection comes in this headline alone.

Seeing at least one downvote, expecting a lot more.

Gonna have to say, wikipedia is free to do what it wants, I'm all for free markets and freedom to choose what they want, I'm not opposed to their choice.

Having said that, there's a good population that exists that don't want to be lied to and we'll just choose somewhere else to get our information if censorship soft or hard continues to get in the way of truth. All I'm saying is people will recognize (and already have recognized) that wikipedia is no longer the source of truth ( and is in many ways controlled by the same personality type of people who are lvl 99 on world of warcraft whose life purpose is to pwn noobs and assert dominance with every living breath )

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#323

Post by replygirl »

robonerd wrote: post #276
replygirl wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not in a practical sense for the user. You don't have to wait 20 minutes for your authorization to clear so you can walk out of Dunkin with your iced coffee

Ironically you're more likely to have such an experience paying with cash these days. I tried to buy a pizza from Dominos last week. Order online, pick up in person and pay with cash. Should have been simple, but it devolved into 5 minutes of Domino's employees trying to figure out "who's on cash?" (Had the credentials to open the cash drawer.) That person was apparently taking a smoke break, but when they came back…

"who's on the bitcoin thing?" is also possible. it's still +n minutes under identical conditions

you're somewhat right about the POS thing. a system like clover, for example, takes credit cards on the main unit, but the cash drawer is an add-on

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#324

Post by robonerd »

ea550ff70a wrote: post #321
robonerd wrote: post #269

In response to these kind of stories, the comment sections online are always filled with crypto advocates upset about the organization not taking their money. This really makes clear who needs who. Crypto needs wikipedia much more than wikipedia needs crypto. Wikipedia is not hard up for cash (if you earnestly believe their begging ads, you must be naive. Give me a break.) But crypto is hard up for legitimacy.

> if you earnestly believe their begging ads, you must be naive. Give me a break. wow you are such an enlightened individual aren't you? Give me a break.

If you don't believe me, go read the financial documents they publish. This topic has been beaten to death innumerable times on this forum and others. They're sitting on a huge pile of cash, far more than they need to operate their already massively bloated organization for many years to come.

They earnestly do not need your funny money.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#325

Post by robonerd »

replygirl wrote: post #323
robonerd wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically you're more likely to have such an experience paying with cash these days. I tried to buy a pizza from Dominos last week. Order online, pick up in person and pay with cash. Should have been simple, but it devolved into 5 minutes of Domino's employees trying to figure out "who's on cash?" (Had the credentials to open the cash drawer.) That person was apparently taking a smoke break, but when they came back…

"who's on the bitcoin thing?" is also possible. it's still +n minutes under identical conditions you're somewhat right about the POS thing. a system like clover, for example, takes credit cards on the main unit, but the cash drawer is an add-on

> "who's on the bitcoin thing?" is also possible. it's still +n minutes under identical conditions

That much seems certain. Switching to bitcoin to avoid the [artificial] annoyances of cash is like jumping out of the frying pan, into the fire.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#326

Post by asterix_pano »

davidgerard wrote: post #301
asterix_pano wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nano is a very interesting one. The foundation developing it focuses on one thing: developing the best digital currency. They don't implement smart-contracts to make it as efficient as possible for example. The feeless aspect is what makes it great but also maybe vulnerable at the same time: the foundation will have to look for external finance a bit like the Linux foundation of which they are taking inspiration.

and their super-fast blockchain manages 70tps ... compare hundreds of tps on other non-PoW blockchains, e.g. private Ethereum

I believe it has one of the best TPS for a decentralised system, and this can be improved with better hardware when the need for higher TPS comes. Now, as it stands today, you can transact on Nano with a 0.4s confirmation time, so higher TPS is not a necessity.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#327

Post by asterix_pano »

asterix_pano wrote: post #326
davidgerard wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and their super-fast blockchain manages 70tps ... compare hundreds of tps on other non-PoW blockchains, e.g. private Ethereum

I believe it has one of the best TPS for a decentralised system, and this can be improved with better hardware when the need for higher TPS comes. Now, as it stands today, you can transact on Nano with a 0.4s confirmation time, so higher TPS is not a necessity.

some interesting data on that point: https://forum.nano.org/t/nano-stress-tests-measuring-bps-cps...

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#328

Post by li2uR3ce »

danamit wrote: post #212
topranks wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- It’s not significant in terms of the funds it brings in. - Crypto has been on a 10+ year long quest for “adoption”. So far it’s been fairly pathetic. Organisations who accept it provide a focal point for crypto advocates to point to, legitimising it and luring more retail investors into the Ponzi. - The environmental impact is massive, which makes accepting it ethically dubious and does not align with the Wikimedia…

I worked and got paid in crypto in the past, which made me able to move out. Also I used crypto to pay for services, I just bought a GPU (for gaming, current one broke, I do not mine crypto) with crypto that's still shipping. I won't call the adoption pathetic, it is just that you are not in the circle of adoption/need. Just like I see people mentioning services here that they say they cannot live without and I do no…

> it can be made to be more environmentally friendly

You don't get points for what *can be* but *what is*.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#329

Post by rg111 »

nemothekid wrote: post #282
ncann wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Core values is just a vague concept. A lot of things considered backwards or even downright evil today used to be core values not too long and vice versa, e.g. racial segregation, LGBT, women's right, etc.

It’s used to be widely accepted that all light travelled through a luminiferous aether that encompasses the entire universe. Then we learned about special relativity. Societies learn and adapt.

I will point out that this comment is factually wrong.

The concept of luminiferous aether was discarded- not because of the discovery of Theory of Relativity, but becauae of the Michelson and Morley Experiment [0].

It is often joked about in High School and college Freshman Physics circles- Michelson received Nobel Prize in Physics [1] for a literally failed experiment.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment

[1]: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1907/summary/

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#330

Post by [deleted] »

robonerd wrote: post #290
jdrc wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wikipedia has no firm rules > Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold, but not reckless, in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: (almost) every past version of a page is saved,…

Absent rules to manipulate to force wikipedia to accept crypto, crypto advocates who want to get their way must rely on their powers of persuasion to influence opinions in the present. The opinions of founders years ago, whatever they might have been, aren't relevant.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN