3 ms·
>I would be much more concerned if Wikipedia's revenue and expenditures were flat over the past decade. Why? The thing of value in wikipedia is the encyclopedi
by CriticalCathed 7y ago
>I would be much more concerned if Wikipedia's revenue and expenditures were flat over the past decade.
Why? The thing of value in wikipedia is the encyclopedia that was Built off of FREE LABOR by VOLUNTEERS. The increases in spending seem to be going to white collar office jobs that aren't actually necessary for The Wiki to exist and thrive. All wiki needs is servers. It shouldn't need to grow.
Wiki isn't a capitalist entity. It doesn't need to play by the rules of capital. And that it is mirroring the pattern of capitalist companies is tremendously worrying for the future of the project.
- elect_engineer 7y agoFull disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer". See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... I think you hit the nail on the head. For a charity that is trying to feed starving children, they can always use more money as long as there are any starving children left. Same with most charities. But if a charity exists to but an encyclopedia on the web, they don't need to keep increasing their spending other than what is needed to cover any increases in the cost of running the servers plus a reasonable amount for support staff. Related: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Frequently_asked_questions#Why_will_it_require_up_to_US$2.5_million_to_develop_a_movement_strategy https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/...?