4 ms·

Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen. For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only

Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen. For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only consider it, but actually go through the effort of actually doing it ... the foundation truly has shit the bed.

nickff 4mo ago
Wikipedia has a lot of money, along with a valuable dataset (for AI); it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. As we saw with OpenAI, it is difficult to keep a non-profit dedicated to its public benefit mission when it has something of tantalizing value.
- kennywinker 4mo ago
  > it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. So, the people who helped create the valuable dataset are “rent seekers” now? Must be using a different definition of rent seeking than any i’ve heard.
  - oh_no 4mo ago
    Foundation didn't create the dataset, just the framework for volunteers to do the work.
    - kennywinker 4mo ago
      Yes, and? Could the dataset have been created without the framework?
  - nickff 4mo ago
    The employees of the Wikipedia foundation did not create the dataset, though they definitely contributed to the infrastructure behind it. Sam Altman (and the OpenAI employees) contributed even more to OpenAI's continuing success (and that of their industry). Both groups are still rent-seekers, as they are attempting to profit off a market position which was developed under different auspices.
    - Apocryphon 4mo ago
      Did you see the subthread that the motivation behind this union does not seem to be collective bargaining over compensation, but in response to management's decision over personnel issues: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48665062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48665062 Indeed, the OP does not mention increased pay at all, but rather "concerns over transparency, trust, and the organisation’s future direction." You can go ahead and call that rhetoric, but you are also reading in intentions that do not seem to match reports from the ground.
      - nickff 4mo ago
        >” You can go ahead and call that rhetoric, but you are also reading in intentions that do not seem to match reports from the ground.” This just seems like standard union rhetoric, like when they talk about quality, or caring about the company’s clients. If the union gets concessions on transparency, and less than a 5% raise for the first year, I’ll do my best to come back to this thread and post a retraction. I don’t think I’ll have to do that.
        aspenmayer 4mo ago
        In good faith I feel obligated to point out the following, so that those who may read this thread in the future don’t interpret any lack of a response on your part as an confirmation of your claims: HN threads close automatically after a few weeks, so I don’t think that you would be able to do that even if you intend to do so. Based on your own rhetoric, I am not convinced that you would even if you could, but I admit that parsing tone in text is difficult, and I may be mistaken. What comes across as sarcasm and hyperbole to me may be earnest and sincere to you. In good faith, I must assume that you don’t know that HN threads close automatically, otherwise I must admit the possibility that I’m wrong, and that you do know this, and are exploiting the fact that others may not know this fact as part of your argumentative strategy.
        kennywinker 4mo ago
        Oddly enough, employers will often give wage increases more easily than other concessions. I’ve seen at least two union negotiation go that way - employees seeking better working conditions are given a hard no on something they are asking for like advance notice of scheduling changes but offered a wage increase in exchange. Also, a 5% raise is approximately what inflation is likely to be this year (2.8% in the UK as of may) so if that’s all they get that’s basically a wage freeze.
- greyface- 4mo ago
  > a valuable dataset It's CC-BY-SA/GFDL, and the underlying copyright belongs to the editors that wrote it. There is no commercial value in reselling access, and WMF does not have the right to relicense it.
- eru 4mo ago
  The dataset is valuable in the same sense that water is valuable. It doesn't fetch a high price, because everyone can get it for free.
jordanb 4mo ago
It's bleak it seems like wikimedia is controlled by the same ghouls who are running Mozilla. Why is it so hard to keep a public interest tech firm honest?
- toomuchtodo 4mo ago
  Power, status, and control attract the same personalities, regardless of entity type.
  - breppp 4mo ago
    It happens that these are also the types that are attracted to union leadership positions
    - toomuchtodo 4mo ago
      Humans are imperfect, systems require continual improvement. I’ll take a suboptimal union over no union any day, especially in the economic human factory farm that is the US. Companies, governments, and unions are all just people. Sometimes we win, sometimes we learn, we try to win more than we learn. I’m not delusional, I’m always going to be working class in compared to predatory wealthy people who do not need to work. I’m not a temporarily embarrassed billionaire. I’ll take every guardrail I can get. And so, I support unions, even though I do not need one. It is a decision based on logic and reason from first principles. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1706 https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1706 https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Labor-Unions-And-The-Middle-Class.pdf https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Labor-Unions-And-...
      - breppp 4mo ago
        That's fair, I have witnessed unions that took companies to the ground, were a center of corruption and created class favoritism between old and new workers. That does not say it cannot work, or is never needed though
shye 4mo ago
Unionization shouldn't be seen as an emergency measure. Even if I would hypothetically accept union as a last resort, which I don't, safety nets should be built not only when you are speeding towards the ground, and often lack the resources, but much before that, when you are safe.
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > safety nets should be built not only when you are speeding towards the ground, and often lack the resources, but much before that, when you are safe Safety nets cost time and resources to build and come at the cost of agility. They shouldn’t be avoided at all costs. But a foundation in an industry where unions aren’t the norm taking that step can correctly be interpreted as a sign management fucked up. Given the foundation’s recent actions, that hypothesis is sustained here.
  - Wololooo 4mo ago
    Unions are a normal thing to happen to guarantee a check of balances, we are used to systems they have their feedback loop, if you have a one sided relationship you cannot have balance because one side will always try to push in their direction. The tug between management and unions is the balance. If you consider that safety is something that is impeding, you have never truly worked at scale nor considered what happens when accident happens, safety is to ensure continuous, painless operation, not impede it and is a baseline condition for trust which is essential to move fast.
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > Unions are a normal thing to happen Most jobs on the planet are non-union. Most jobs historically are non-union. Describing that as “a normal thing” ignores the amount of effort they take to erect and maintain. > The tug between management and unions is the balance The fundamental tug is between capital and labour. Management intermediates, normally, capital. (Owner managers are the exception.) Labour can be intermediated by agents and/or unions, though they’re far from “normal.” (More common is owner-management of labour, e.g. in small trades.) > If you consider that safety is something that is impeding Straw man.
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
neilk 4mo ago
> For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! Why do you feel so certain about that?

nickff 4mo ago

Wikipedia has a lot of money, along with a valuable dataset (for AI); it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. As we saw with OpenAI, it is difficult to keep a non-profit dedicated to its public benefit mission when it has something of tantalizing value.

kennywinker 4mo ago
> it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. So, the people who helped create the valuable dataset are “rent seekers” now? Must be using a different definition of rent seeking than any i’ve heard.
- oh_no 4mo ago
  Foundation didn't create the dataset, just the framework for volunteers to do the work.
  - kennywinker 4mo ago
    Yes, and? Could the dataset have been created without the framework?
- nickff 4mo ago
  The employees of the Wikipedia foundation did not create the dataset, though they definitely contributed to the infrastructure behind it. Sam Altman (and the OpenAI employees) contributed even more to OpenAI's continuing success (and that of their industry). Both groups are still rent-seekers, as they are attempting to profit off a market position which was developed under different auspices.
  - Apocryphon 4mo ago
    Did you see the subthread that the motivation behind this union does not seem to be collective bargaining over compensation, but in response to management's decision over personnel issues: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48665062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48665062 Indeed, the OP does not mention increased pay at all, but rather "concerns over transparency, trust, and the organisation’s future direction." You can go ahead and call that rhetoric, but you are also reading in intentions that do not seem to match reports from the ground.
    - nickff 4mo ago
      >” You can go ahead and call that rhetoric, but you are also reading in intentions that do not seem to match reports from the ground.” This just seems like standard union rhetoric, like when they talk about quality, or caring about the company’s clients. If the union gets concessions on transparency, and less than a 5% raise for the first year, I’ll do my best to come back to this thread and post a retraction. I don’t think I’ll have to do that.
      - aspenmayer 4mo ago
        In good faith I feel obligated to point out the following, so that those who may read this thread in the future don’t interpret any lack of a response on your part as an confirmation of your claims: HN threads close automatically after a few weeks, so I don’t think that you would be able to do that even if you intend to do so. Based on your own rhetoric, I am not convinced that you would even if you could, but I admit that parsing tone in text is difficult, and I may be mistaken. What comes across as sarcasm and hyperbole to me may be earnest and sincere to you. In good faith, I must assume that you don’t know that HN threads close automatically, otherwise I must admit the possibility that I’m wrong, and that you do know this, and are exploiting the fact that others may not know this fact as part of your argumentative strategy.
      - kennywinker 4mo ago
        Oddly enough, employers will often give wage increases more easily than other concessions. I’ve seen at least two union negotiation go that way - employees seeking better working conditions are given a hard no on something they are asking for like advance notice of scheduling changes but offered a wage increase in exchange. Also, a 5% raise is approximately what inflation is likely to be this year (2.8% in the UK as of may) so if that’s all they get that’s basically a wage freeze.
greyface- 4mo ago
> a valuable dataset It's CC-BY-SA/GFDL, and the underlying copyright belongs to the editors that wrote it. There is no commercial value in reselling access, and WMF does not have the right to relicense it.
eru 4mo ago
The dataset is valuable in the same sense that water is valuable. It doesn't fetch a high price, because everyone can get it for free.

jordanb 4mo ago

It's bleak it seems like wikimedia is controlled by the same ghouls who are running Mozilla. Why is it so hard to keep a public interest tech firm honest?

toomuchtodo 4mo ago
Power, status, and control attract the same personalities, regardless of entity type.
- breppp 4mo ago
  It happens that these are also the types that are attracted to union leadership positions
  - toomuchtodo 4mo ago
    Humans are imperfect, systems require continual improvement. I’ll take a suboptimal union over no union any day, especially in the economic human factory farm that is the US. Companies, governments, and unions are all just people. Sometimes we win, sometimes we learn, we try to win more than we learn. I’m not delusional, I’m always going to be working class in compared to predatory wealthy people who do not need to work. I’m not a temporarily embarrassed billionaire. I’ll take every guardrail I can get. And so, I support unions, even though I do not need one. It is a decision based on logic and reason from first principles. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1706 https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1706 https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Labor-Unions-And-The-Middle-Class.pdf https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Labor-Unions-And-...
    - breppp 4mo ago
      That's fair, I have witnessed unions that took companies to the ground, were a center of corruption and created class favoritism between old and new workers. That does not say it cannot work, or is never needed though

shye 4mo ago

Unionization shouldn't be seen as an emergency measure. Even if I would hypothetically accept union as a last resort, which I don't, safety nets should be built not only when you are speeding towards the ground, and often lack the resources, but much before that, when you are safe.

JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
> safety nets should be built not only when you are speeding towards the ground, and often lack the resources, but much before that, when you are safe Safety nets cost time and resources to build and come at the cost of agility. They shouldn’t be avoided at all costs. But a foundation in an industry where unions aren’t the norm taking that step can correctly be interpreted as a sign management fucked up. Given the foundation’s recent actions, that hypothesis is sustained here.
- Wololooo 4mo ago
  Unions are a normal thing to happen to guarantee a check of balances, we are used to systems they have their feedback loop, if you have a one sided relationship you cannot have balance because one side will always try to push in their direction. The tug between management and unions is the balance. If you consider that safety is something that is impeding, you have never truly worked at scale nor considered what happens when accident happens, safety is to ensure continuous, painless operation, not impede it and is a baseline condition for trust which is essential to move fast.
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > Unions are a normal thing to happen Most jobs on the planet are non-union. Most jobs historically are non-union. Describing that as “a normal thing” ignores the amount of effort they take to erect and maintain. > The tug between management and unions is the balance The fundamental tug is between capital and labour. Management intermediates, normally, capital. (Owner managers are the exception.) Labour can be intermediated by agents and/or unions, though they’re far from “normal.” (More common is owner-management of labour, e.g. in small trades.) > If you consider that safety is something that is impeding Straw man.

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

neilk 4mo ago

> For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! Why do you feel so certain about that?