Do not start a headline with “Darkness reigns over Wikipedia”!!!
What’s wrong with Darkness?
The year is 2024, hacker news stands strong as only remaining website to not offer darkmode.
Thou art forbidden to peruse our content in the dead of night; verily, our content is for the light of day alone.
deleted by creator
Get on my level.
How long were you searching for “worse than Comic Sans” before you landed on that one?
That purp though, fully behind it
“Getting paid is weird and sometimes hard” Wtf…
spoken by a true philosophy major
Just hacker things
Have you heard of lightbulbs?
Gotta get Hack, its an HN client/front-end. Beautiful and has all that stuff, otherwise the website is very non-addicting to me, I’ll give them that.
Thanks, I ended up getting harmonic. Seems to do the job. It’s baffling that hacker news is like that
These are dark times
Indeed.
No, thats the job hunting website. Wikipedia is the one anyone can edit historical facts.
(Which is apparently a workspace AI company)
If you are on desktop and you aren’t sure how it works, try out this Wiki page and in the top right corner you can see an “eyeglasses” looking icon. Click that and set it to Automatic or Dark.
Very happy to see it come to wikipedia!!
But I think it also needs some polish. The contrast is too high and the blue on black of the hyperlinks is too garish for sure.
The Washington Post: “Democracy dies in darkness”
Wikipedia: “Knowledge that is shared in torchlight is fucking awesome”
Democracy dies in darkness
From what I’ve seen, it dies in plain sight to standing ovations
Finally the l33t hax0rz from Anonymous can browse Wikipedia in peace
Finally I don’t need to have an account just to have dark mode
People were making accounts?!
Ive been using browser extensions.
It was an experimental gadget setting under your profile.
I’ve been using userstyles, but nothing seems to have worked as well as the built in feature for me.
Dark mode, night mode, light-on-dark design, or whatever you want to call the version of computer content that doesn’t feel blindingly bright at night…
Don’t wanna be that guy, but these template news-article openings always make my brain hurt. Come on, as if everyone has ever called it anything else than “Dark mode”.
I thought this was gonna be about Wikipedia finally shutting down because nobody donates
They are actually getting too many donations, many times more than they need to run wikipedia. There was and is a big conflict about the unsustainable growth of donations to the foundation and its questionable use of those funds.
Wikimedia Foundation (the org behind the Wikipedia and similar projects) does get more donations than their operational cost, but that’s expected. The idea is that they’ll invest the extra fund[1] and some day the return alone will be able to sustain Wikipedia forever.
Although, some have criticized that the actual situation is not clearly conveyed in their asking for donation message. It gives people an impression that Wikipedia is going under if you don’t donate.
Others also criticized that the feature development is slow compared to the funding, or that not enough portion is allocated to the feature development. See how many years it takes to get dark mode! I don’t know how it’s decided or what’s their target, so I can’t really comment on this.
They publish their annual financial auditions[2] and you can have a read if you’re interested. There are some interesting things. For example, in 2022-2023, processing donations actually costs twice as much as internet hosting, which one would expect to be the major expense.
Similar to Mozilla (but not from donations but instead of its millions paid to it by Google)
Huh, now that is a truly interesting bit of information.
An interesting bit of information without any sources at all…
As is good and proper on Lemmy
Providing sources is probably a lot more common on Lemmy than anywhere else
idk man, i’d probably bet money on scientific papers,
Lol obviously I meant places where random users post content
they’re a non profit, so their either banking money in a proverbial “war chest” or they’re just nabbing donations to be used in the future, for large expansions or what not.
It’s an interesting problem to have, being a non profit entity.
Remember, if you donate to the WMF, they will use that money to enforce “WMF global bans” against users trying to make useful contributions but who once looked at the wrong people funny.
Who’s trying to making useful contributions but got banned, and what were they banned for?
One of the earliest global bans was against user “russavia” - research him and you’ll know what I’m talking about. After that I stopped following Wikimedia internals because it was 100% clear that they were now just completely arbitrarily banning people.
Banned user Russavia edited two of the oligarch articles. He was a very active administrator on Wikimedia Commons, who specialized in promoting the Russian aviation industry, and in disrupting the English-language Wikipedia.
After finally being banned on the English Wikipedia, he created dozens of sockpuppets. Russavia, by almost all accounts, is not a citizen or resident of Russia, but his edits raise some concern and show some patterns.
In 2010, he boasted, on his userpage at Commons, that he had obtained permission from the official Kremlin.ru site for all photos there to be uploaded to Commons under Creative Commons licenses. He also made 148 edits at Russo-Georgian War, and 321 edits on the ridiculously detailed International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Both of these articles were, at one time, strongly biased in favor of Russia.
Idk, when you’re using Wikipedia as a tool to push Russian propaganda, it seems fair that you’d be banned. That’s not what Wikipedia is for. He’s free to start russopedia.ru or whatever if he wants to do that.
You could have just said you’re upset that a Russian propagandist was banned. Would have been quicker and more honest lol.
Great. Making generalizing statements based on ONE case from over 10 years ago, which was - at best - debatable (see other response).
deleted by creator
I can’t be the only one who doesn’t see well with dark mode.
You’re not, but having both is awesoooooome!
democracy dies in dark mode
A long time coming, but because of their recent changes in the past couple of months if I have JS disabled on Wikipedia I either have an obnoxiously large blank margin on the right, or I get pop-up annoyed by this dark mode announcement with JS enabled and private tab browsing.
Yeah, I noticed that the JavaScript bloat is slowly taking over Wikipedia.
yeah, cant say im huge fan of the new margins, it’s starting to look more and more like every article tabloid site ever.
LOL took 'em long enough.
Isn’t this like one of the signs of the end times?
Or the start of a new age of enlightment and the spread of ideas online with ease.
Perhaps it was only a sign of the end (of the bad) times after all
