Thread

1. basilikum · 1789500380 · focus · HN ↗

   Mad props to the people at the Archive. You are the heros we need in a formerly open internet that is surrendering to evil big corps and closing down free access.

   The Internet Archive is in a really bad spot being attacked from multiple sides at once. But — while service has not been consistent — they have maintained open access. I can still access anonymously from Tor without Cloudflare or some other centralized gatekeeper showing me the middle finger.

   If you got some money to spare, consider donating to them. They need it.

   1. superxpro12 · 1789501033 · focus · HN ↗

      fully expect them and wikipedia to get assaulted by AI companies to monopolize data source access in the near future.

      The future is bleak :\

      1. mrguyorama · 1789505274 · focus · HN ↗

         I'm expecting a full court legal attack on Wikipedia at some point. It's just too good for information, and companies would rather you use their chatbot to regurgitate that info now that they have their own copies. Google was already built to pretend as if they had some magic system giving you "Answers" that were 95% just the text of the infobox they used to have for wikipedia on the side.

         It's going to suddenly be extremely valuable that wikipedia didn't settle for having a small rainy day fund and instead ceaselessly grabbed every fucking donation they could for two decades so they can fight such a legal battle.

         1. nephihaha · 1789508872 · focus · HN ↗

            Wikipedia is not a challenge to the system. If it were, it would be excluded from search results, much like blogs are now.

            1. mitxela · 1789556839 · focus · HN ↗

               This became obvious to me when from 2023-2025 they refused to call it anything other than "Israel-Hamas war"

               It's since been renamed to "Gaza genocide", as it should have been all along - but it took forever to get there.

               This is because of their policy of only mirroring what mainstream media outlets are saying.

               1. swaghali · 1789558683 · focus · HN ↗

                  It’s the only “genocide” in history where the population being genocided grew during their genocide.

                  1. mitxela · 1789559390 · focus · HN ↗

                     this is not correct

                     1. swaghali · 1789560427 · focus · HN ↗

                        Are you disputing that Gaza had more births than reported deaths during this period, or do you have other examples of “genocides” where the population grew during their genocide?

                        1. mitxela · 1789563011 · focus · HN ↗

                           <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Brandolini%27s_law" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Brandolini%27s_law

                           Account created 1 hour ago and only made these two comments, no others. Dang should investigate where these bots are coming from.

                           1. swaghali · 1789567093 · focus · HN ↗

                              Funny how you led with a desire to get Wikipedia to align with one side in a conflict, and an opposition to the “mainstream” having no diversity of opinion in your view, yet the moment you are confronted with alternative viewpoints and facts you refuse to engage with the content, and instead try to silence views that you don’t like.
               2. HappyPanacea · 1789567096 · focus · HN ↗

                  This tells us more about your bias then Wikipedia bias, observe that WWII and Bosnian War have their own Wikipedia articles regardless of any genocide occurring in them.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.