[–] InfidelAl 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

Wikipedia, Reddit, ESPN, the entire news media...

[–] Rotteuxx 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

[–] Elemental_Lightning 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I simply blocked the sub, after reading a few post

[–] AgentAlbinoMonkey 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Don't forget nearly the entire gaming industry.

[–] scabs_galore 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

There needs to be some sort of blockchain solution that allows a site like wikipedia to be decentralised and free of Authoritarian Left domination. Their tired old globalist egalitarian narrative is tedious as fuck

[–] iriecolorado 1 points 12 points (+13|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The only thing that is going break their control is stringing up ever last globalist by their necks from lamp posts. We've been past the point of no return for decades now. People are starting to realize that no elections, laws, policies, regulations, marches, demonstrations, technology or any amount of money is going to break their icy grip. Only blood in the streets will do that.

[–] gbiota1 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

killing them would only kick the can down the road, its the ideas that need to be beaten. It's their cheating that needs to be undermined, and reliable systems that can be trusted which need to develop. May be much easier if we all become immortal. Their bread and butter lies in tricking the young.

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

A blockchain would only replace the server; the underlying mechanisms that got us here would remain. In the end, Wikipedia may well have been the worst thing to happen to the internet: rather than searching across the web to find wisdom across multiple websites, people now cluster to a single gospel. Unfortunately, there's no going back at this point.

[–] mamwad 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

So... trade in authoritarian leftism for a decentralized, confederalized model of communal ownership and distribution...

Congratulations, you're an anti-tankie leftist.

[–] bikergang_accountant 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 


[–] TaveuniThunder 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

This. Yes. Folks, please use/support Infogalactic.

[–] mamwad 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

It's actually pretty good. I decided to check it out after hearing about it here. Right wingers like it, so I expected it to be right wing propaganda like conservapedia. So, I did some test searches. First thing I searched was communism. And, the page actually provided well-cited, politically unbiased information.

In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal")[1][2] is the social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money,[3][4] and the state.[5][6]

I was expecting, "Communism is when the government owns everything and enslaves the people" or some stupid shit like that.

[–] juan_cierva 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I checked it, added it to my search bar.

If it takes off, what's to stop it from becoming Wikipedia 2, though?

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Its Seven Canons look like they'll be tougher to breach than WIkipedia's Five Pillars. Only time will tell if objectivity survives, though.

[–] Zaqwert 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Wikipedia by its very nature lends itself to a vocal minority.

The hardcore SJW freaks are very enthusiastic and has absolutely nothing else to do.

[–] zipcodemonster 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Plus I think it appeals to them that a collection of facts can be edited. It's kind of their thing.

[–] yjGVlGF6b 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

For those that don't know, InfoGalactic is a fork of wikipedia that promotes non bias.

From their Intro page:

Infogalactic does not share the highly centralized structure of Wikipedia or the ideological dogma of the Wikimedia Foundation

The primary requirements are for the information contributed to be true, relevant, and verifiable, rather than cited from a so-called “published reliable source”

There is no culture of notability, ideology, or deletionism at Infogalactic.

Infogalactic is designed around the idea that the user should be permitted to decide what information is relevant to him, not 500 ideologically-driven thought police.

And here is the Seven Cannons of InfoGlactic.

They're fantastic.

[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Wikipedia's "published reliable source" is really one of the dumbest things about the site and very few people who use the site have a clue what it means for the reliability of the information they are getting.

[–] juan_cierva 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Just the warning, "This article relies too much on primary sources ...." which one sees on Wikipeda articles raises big question marks in my mind. Like, don't quote Aristotle when you're talking about what Aristotle said, quote what modern philosophy bloggers say about what he said. Not a recipe for accuracy.

[–] rainaw 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Wow, I didn't know about InfoGalactic. I think I'm going to start using this

plus it helps that my teachers get mad when I use wikipedia lmao

[–] Koalemos_Grottesco 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Wikipedia didn't just passively let it happen, they fucking encouraged it with their "feminist edit-a-thons"

[–] SUPERNIGGER3000 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

It was painfully obvious when they upped https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites and didnt put cnn on there, just offbeat and conservative news

[–] PeBeFri 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

This right here is why we need public libraries. To everyone who says "Why do we still need libraries when there's (Wikipedia/Google/etc.)?," please think about what you're saying. Public libraries are beholden to the public, not to shareholders or thought police.

load more comments ▼ (15 remaining)