this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
461 points (92.6% liked)

Fediverse

17797 readers
50 users here now

A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.

Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".

Getting started on Fediverse;

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 58 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

I don't think a federated wiki is solving any of the problems of wikipedia. You've just made a wiki that is more easily spammed and will have very few contributors. Yes, Wikipedia is centralized, but it's a good thing. No one has to chase down the just perfect wikipedia site to find general information, just the one. The negative of wikipedia is more its sometimes questionable moderation and how its english-centric. This has more to do with fundamentally unequal internet infrastructure in most countries than anything though. Imperialism holds back tech.

I agree that it might be fine for niche wikis but again, why in the world would you ever want your niche wiki federated? Sounds like a tech solution looking for the wrong problem.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I think it solves the problems of Fandom, but yeah Wikipedia is good

[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Wikipedia is good

until you want to learn about a group or country opposed to the west and then it's about as educational as stormfront

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Wikipedia doesn't replace books. In my comment at least that's why I was specific about "general information". I think everyone must be aware that when it comes to Wikipedia on history or current events, it will largely be from a liberal and pro-west perspective. Not all the time, and usually the references and further reading sections point in more interesting directions. But this is far more valuable than the most boring so-called Marxist wikis. If you want critical history, go read historians like Gerald Horne, read first-hand accounts from journalists like Edgar Snow and so on.

Besides the purely political, wikipedia is also good for overviews on technical and scientific interests. Even with the negatives of wikipedia, I'd take it any day over some decentralized spam fest where its a gamble if you found the best version of some article. Not to mention core issues of the fediverse, such as whether the hypothetical wiki instance you found yourself on will sustain itself long-term.

Some days I wonder if the core Lemmy developers have drifted further towards anarchist politics and philosophy..

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Self-hosting any wiki software solves the problems of Fandom, surely? I fail to see how federation solves any of Fandom's issues.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

No, for the same reason forums can't replace reddit. Self hosted wikis have been around before and after fandom. The reason it became popular was giving you all the fandom wikis together, one account, discoverable, user friendly so regulars can contribute. If I have to sign up to every fandom wiki I can contribute to, learn a new interface (likely something old and not mobile friendly) and rebuilt up any reputation to gain extra editing rights... I just won't.

Ibis then in theory allows you to use one account, federate your reputation, use one interface, with lots of third party options if you don't like the official one (if lemmy is any indication) and have discoverability of new wikis.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There is actually at least one other: Conservapedia. It's for people who live in a weird right-wing fantasy land.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago

Conservapedia views Albert Einstein's theory of relativity as promoting moral relativism, ...

ithinkihadastroke

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

sometimes questionable moderation

That's one way of putting it. Another way is "ramrodding the narratives of anglo chauvinists that are to the right of even the neoliberal historical consensus".

[–] mindbleach 9 points 8 months ago

Arguably even Fandom / Wikia is ruined by plain old greed more than centralization. What's wrong with it isn't content, it's the fact every page loads seven ads, a roll of clickbait, and a goddamn Discord server. A weird blog site for editable text and tiny images would work fine if it wasn't twisted to feed Engagemagog.