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

Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–389 of 389 posts

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#381

Post by hackyhacky »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #377
Pay08 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Language as a whole is subjective.

This feels rather hand wavy and reductive. The bar isn’t “Wikipedia is completely unbiased and objective” - that’s a fool’s errand, it can’t be done. But we still strive to account for biases and reach for objectivity as best we can, and there are situations where language (with its subjectivity taken into due consideration) and claims clearly are not an attempt at that.

Correct. All language is subjective, but not all language is equally subjective.

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#382

Post by wlonkly »

thrance wrote: post #316
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> an encyclopedia that, to be honest, is about as unbiased, astroturf-free, and low barrier of entry as you can get. I recently read an article about a notable person. The article attacked her personal appearance as having "Mar-a-Lago Face". I'm certain it was backed up with quality "sources". The outrageous part is that description linked to a deranged multi-page article explaining what that is, written by who I ass…

Surely, you must have taken on yourself to correct this blatant mistake (that you curiously won't link to)? Can you name this "notable person"?

I was also curious. It looks like it's probably Kristy Noem[1], and the citations are to The Week and the NYT:

> Noem has since become one of the most prominent examples of so-called "Mar-a-Lago face", a cosmetic surgery trend among conservative women,[370][371] also known as "Republican makeup".[372]

Is [370] pushing it for a biography of a living person? Yeah, probably, especially with the "one of the most prominent" and "so-called" in there. But since "Mar-a-Lago face" has its own, cited Wikipedia entry... maybe not? It's not like Wikipedians made up the term, they're citing that _others_ use that term for her.

I'm not sure how I'd phrase it to say that she is a prominent example of the plastic surgery common to the Republican inner circle, and reference the "Mar-a-Lago Face" article, without attributing the phrase to her plastic surgery.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristi_Noem#Religion_and_publi...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar-a-Lago_face

[370] https://theweek.com/health/mar-a-lago-face-the-hottest-maga-...

[371] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/20/style/kristi-noem-teeth-t...

[372] https://www.thelist.com/1796655/politicians-reporters-republ...

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#383

Post by ccgreg »

internet_points wrote: post #299
dmurray wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "abstract Wikipedia" just seems like a solved problem with LLMs. However sceptical of "AI" you are, "give me the information on this page in my preferred language" is the kind of task they excel at. (I won't use the word translate ). It wouldn't even require prioritising the English Wikipedia: any agent today could one shot a task like "check the Wikipedia pages in all languages for X, summarize the results and n…

> However sceptical of "AI" you are, "give me the information on this page in my preferred language" is the kind of task they excel at. Except for the 90% or more of the world's 7000-ish languages which have barely any data online. E.g. the huge CommonCrawl corpus has stats https://commoncrawl.github.io/cc-crawl-statistics/plots/lang... for only 160 languages. English takes up nearly half the corpus, and after the to…

Common Crawl is working hard to improve diversity in our crawl.

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#384

Post by LewisVerstappen »

ninkendo wrote: post #190
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yeah. Also, I basically stopped visiting my building’s first floor because all the amenities I need are on my level now. I’m not sure I agree with the whole “buildings need foundations” stuff anymore.

Deep Research links to first hand sources and does a better job of summarizing them than Wikipedia.

You realize wikipedia is built on sources right?

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#385

Post by scottyah »

slg wrote: post #209
scottyah wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or because the logistics behind scaling are much much much easier than any physical product.

Why do the benefits of logistics go to people at the top of the food chain rather than being spread out evenly among everyone? That type of democratization of the benefits is the exact type of thing unions are meant to achieve.

That's how scaling works- more product and distribution with less people. As proven by Amazon, it's what consumers want. Unions only function by taking a share of money and giving it to less people- it's the only way each person makes more.

You're saying that we should have more people get paid by artificially paying less people more...

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#386

Post by fragmede »

scottyah wrote: post #385
slg wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do the benefits of logistics go to people at the top of the food chain rather than being spread out evenly among everyone? That type of democratization of the benefits is the exact type of thing unions are meant to achieve.

That's how scaling works- more product and distribution with less people. As proven by Amazon, it's what consumers want. Unions only function by taking a share of money and giving it to less people- it's the only way each person makes more. You're saying that we should have more people get paid by artificially paying less people more...

> Unions only function by taking a share of money and giving it to less people

Isn't that backwards? Don't they take money that previously would be going to the CEO/C-suite; (aka profit), and give it to the union and it's members? The corporation certainly isn't sharing it with the public (aka lower prices) for the fun off it.

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#387

Post by scottyah »

fragmede wrote: post #386
scottyah wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how scaling works- more product and distribution with less people. As proven by Amazon, it's what consumers want. Unions only function by taking a share of money and giving it to less people- it's the only way each person makes more. You're saying that we should have more people get paid by artificially paying less people more...

> Unions only function by taking a share of money and giving it to less people Isn't that backwards? Don't they take money that previously would be going to the CEO/C-suite; (aka profit), and give it to the union and it's members? The corporation certainly isn't sharing it with the public (aka lower prices) for the fun off it.

Well at some level it is taking away from the larger group of shareholders, but at the end of the day Unions are pretty ineffective at redistributing money from C-Suite to a larger group of people. I haven't seen a union that was all workers vs. C-Suite, it's more like the factory workers take away from accounting or engineering departments. That usually doesn't work out for company morale, leading to worse running and everyone makes less. Totally dependent on the company though, not all unions are bad it's just not a one-size-fits-all and in my experience they've done more harm than good.

You end up just having to cover slackers who choose the life of working less and making less money, but at a company where others want to work harder.

Re: Big tech's anti-labor playbook has come for Wikipedia

#389

Post by wsve »

skinfaxi wrote: post #388
wsve wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but notice that the pope gets paid very well

I thought the pope doesn't receive a salary?

That's right, my bad, I just meant that he's clearly doing just fine but said something very wrong instead
Post reply on HN