• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    197 months ago

    This serves well as a statement.

    It is, however, delusional to think that at this point anything can become a viable alternative to Wikipedia, unless Wikimedia collapses because of reasons from within.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        87 months ago

        You can already download the entirity of Wikipedia. If it ever fell, the content could easily be restored elsewhere.

        Also, I don’t think I understand why this should be federated.

        • Cowbee [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          87 months ago

          The infrastructure is already there in that case, to restore it, and it would be less likely to fall.

          Having no sole source of information hosting in an encyclopedic format is safer.

          • @derpgon
            link
            57 months ago

            But having an open data project full of information that’s actively contributed to and fact checked, with copies over many servers, is much better than having the same thing but fragmented. I still don’t see a reason. If it was something else or corporate driven, I wouldn’t bat an eye. But Wikipedia?

            • Cowbee [he/him]
              link
              fedilink
              17 months ago

              You can have all of that good if you want to, but being federated allows people to break off if they want. It also allows for niche servers.