- cross-posted to:
- privacy@programming.dev
- europe@feddit.org
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@programming.dev
- europe@feddit.org
You must log in or # to comment.
Will libraries be requiring age verification to access encyclopaedias and other non-fiction material? Because of the children, of course!
You got a loicense for that desiring knowledge, bruv?
1000% Wikipedia needs to blackout in the UK and tell users to call their MPs
The only rational decision, given the cost associated with a poorly defined and maliciously enforced legislative code. I wouldn’t trust the UK courts to fairly adjudicate an alleged breach of the law, particularly if Reform Party gets into office and decides to punish Wikipedia’s management for “Wokeness” or whatever.
On the one hand, this is obviously a terrible authoritarian law and it should be repealed, but on the other hand, I’m not sure I like companies having the power or the influence to affect laws. TikTok telling its users to protest its ban in the US back in January comes to mind.
Wikipedia is basically a charity that gives people free knowledge. No one profits off of it. What you describe is called civil society, where interest groups attempt to convince the government to take certain actions, and (only without profit motive, in my opinion) it’s one of a few indicators of democracy.
Yes and no. Sometimes a company or organization can serve as a force for good. That said, absolutely a double edged sword. It’s not fair to expect private businesses and organizations to be held hostage by scummy legislators. At the end of the day, no one is entitled to a business’s or organization’s services, so… Don’t want to chase businesses and organizations away? Don’t pass shitty legislation.
I would replace “companies” with “non-profits”. Cause it’s pretty clear that companies do hold that kind of power. Let me broadly gesture to the companies paying off these hack politicians to pass these laws i.e.; apple, alphabet, meta, and so on.
Wtf are you being downvoted, you’re absolutely right.
The fact that people are so powerless that only corps can fight this shit is maddening.
I’ve said it before, the UK populace has lost all privileges to make fun of Americans, they are as batshit as the trumpets here.
lol they’ve already had that power for decades. This is where you’re going to get stubborn about it? Suspicious.
If “stubborn” is what you read from my comment, I’m not sure what to tell you.
Big tech lobbying is behind all this
Currently I cannot edit using my VPN as that is blocked by Wikipedia, so I guess if that remains the case and they are forced to implement ID to edit articles, then I will no longer be able to contribute
Ironically you probably have to identify yourself to Wikipedia to get such an exception…
I don’t know what you mean by “identify yourself”. You need an account with a trustworthy history of editing, at which point you can request the exemption.
That’s a catch-22 for good faith new contributors, of course
Correct, as it has to. In addition to behavior, CheckUsers use IP addresses to help identify sockpuppets. If you could bypass the exemption by just saying “here’s a new account; pls exempt”, it would quickly become common knowledge among sockmasters that all they need is to quickly ask and be accepted days later.
At that point, the block on proxy editing near-completely fails at one of its main functions.
Of course. It’s probably the lesser of two evils, but is unfortunate regardless
I’d disagree with the notion “it has to”. The chilling effect on a large number of new wiki contributors could be considered more detrimental than weakening sock puppet protection. (IE if a huge country suddenly started jailing people who make edits not considered state-approved)
I suspect there are plenty of ways to allow new accounts to make edits on a smaller subset of articles until they have passed some threshold of trust which could minimize the sock puppet abuse.
Point is everything is a give and take.
I wonder if now is a good time to download all Wikipedia and put it on a spare offline drive…
Kiwix is wonderful for the job. It’s surprising how much of Wikipedia can fit on 128 GB when larger media files are stripped out.
I do kind of relish the images, though. Picture’s worth a thousand words and all. But it’s great to have that choice.
Picture
Usually worth around a few million characters.
Wikipedia need to cut off access to the UK except through VPNs.
Coincidentally Wikipedia is the only website I can think of that I’d actually be remotely comfortable with having my identity.
Isn’t the issue that for any economical solution websites enlist 3rd parties to do the verification? It’s those (usually US) companies holding my ID that is the problem.
The EU is developing their own centralized system
Then you’re not thinking like someone who lives under authoritarians. Have you never gone on a Wikipedia journey following links and ended up on “gunpowder” or “list of dictators in the 21st century” or anything else that could get you painted as a “revolutionary” and locked away?
I’m generally more annoyed at how the early enthusiasm of participation on the site has died out in the face of paranoia and moderator mania. There are so many gaps in both the modern and historical backlog of citations and categorizations. But do I want to invest dozens of hours contributing to a site where a few admins are just going to tear all my work back out again on a bureaucratic technicality?
It is a site that’s alternatively being strangled to death by admins fearful of malicious actors and tore apart by wave after wave of sinister propagandists and hostile agents.
You’re right, the mods are unhinged, almost Reddit level.
And yet I’m sure you read it pretty regularly, and it’s a net good in your life. It’s easy to focus on the negatives and miss what an absolute treasure it still is.
Edit: and it seems it’s been a while since you were a young student and have forgotten what that experience is like. You know many things now, but you didn’t start that way.
I’m sure you read it pretty regularly
I’ve found it less and less capable of keeping up with current events. Enshittification truly comes for us all.
It’s easy to focus on the negatives and miss what an absolute treasure it still is.
As a historical artifact and a demonstration of the potential for open-sourced editing, it’s a milestone. But we’re clearly in the twilight of the Wikipedia era.
It’s never really been all that great about current events. That’s the cost of being “neutral” and letting everything settle into hindsight. However the vast majority of human knowledge isn’t current events. Even if Wikipedia were to never get updated again it is still extremely useful.
However the vast majority of human knowledge isn’t current events.
Broadly speaking, everything was a current event at some point. As Wikipedia calcifies, it loses the ability to capture and collate new information as it is produced.
Even if Wikipedia were to never get updated again it is still extremely useful.
In the same way as any dated encyclopedia, sure. I’ve got a copy of my dad’s childhood encyclopedia, dated to 1954. Lots of interesting factoids in there, assuming your interest in the world is satisfied by an English speaking editor’s ability to consolidate the information available to his firm at their publishing deadline.
On its face… maybe? Until the Foundation falls into the hands of malicious management, anyway.
But do I trust that a public website can’t have their security breached by malicious actors? Of course not.
Wikipedia doesn’t have to do shit.
Let them break their internet until they fix it.
when Wikipedia is suing you, you might be the bad guy
Better get a Kiwix server spun up.
Wikipedia will never block the UK because they value accessible information, however obstructed it may be, more.
You mean Wikipedia will bow down to a Western government and obey their every command?
Do you think Wikipedia would make special exceptions for China or Russia?
Retaining truthful information with obstructed access is not the same as offering redacted or altered information to a specific region.
The UK is demanding that Wikipedia redacts information for users which refuse to identify themselves, and users under 18. It’s far worse than simply not showing certain articles.
Welp, time to invade the UK. They were overdue.
Let the French invade them.
they had it coming. they invaded countless other civilisations.
