3 ms·
The point is that while views have increased by 10x over the past 15 years, expenses have increased by 1250x. That leaves a 125x increase in per-user spending t
by AbrahamParangi 7y ago
The point is that while views have increased by 10x over the past 15 years, expenses have increased by 1250x. That leaves a 125x increase in per-user spending that does not appear to be reflected in commensurate increases in user value.
- slowenough 7y ago> while views increased 10x over the past 15 years, expenses have increased by 1250x. That leaves a 125x Wikipedia is probably a money laundering operation. How else to explain the cooked books feel of those numbers? Edit: wow way to anger The herd! seems I've hit a nerve so I know I must be onto something. The fact that people don't want to consider this point of view makes it more likely to be the case because it's shielded from inspection, by The mirage of goodness conveyed by Wikipedia's reputation perhaps its charity status. I suppose such shielding must be how many money laundering operations work to disguise themselves. so people being outraged at the suggestion is exactly as intended and doing the work of hiding the money laundering business. This is fascinating. Well done!