Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Foo (http://www.bikeforums.net/foo/)
-   -   Mr Wikipedia wants money from us. Crikey! :-) (http://www.bikeforums.net/foo/497119-mr-wikipedia-wants-money-us-crikey.html)

531Aussie 12-25-08 10:32 PM

Mr Wikipedia wants money from us. Crikey! :-)
 
:thumb:

Hmmmm, dunno

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/...ser2008#appeal

UnsafeAlpine 12-25-08 10:35 PM

Why wouldn't you contribute? What are the other options for wikipedia?

Blue Roads 12-25-08 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 531Aussie (Post 8077892)
Mr Wikipedia wants money from us.

In other words, their grants, donations, and foundation investments have tanked (the latter, just like everyone else). Not a surprise.

Snowsurfer 12-26-08 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnsafeAlpine (Post 8077904)
What are the other options for wikipedia?

Start your own "-ipedia" dot com website that has advertisements to cover costs of running it, but remains FREE and does not require donations.:thumb:

cawoodwilly 12-26-08 12:55 PM

I don't think they really need money being us the visitors to the web site puts in all the information for them. A domain name only cost about 7 dollars a year and unlimited web hosting on yahoo servers only cost about 12 dollars a month with a free domain name. Pay Pal credit card acceptance is free, and you only pay fees when you get a donation. I know there are other cost but with 10,000,000 (ten million) visitors per day they should have no problem with cash flow. They need to get rid of that Jet and those limos and sell about 10 of their 20 beach front homes.

I have 9 websites with about 6000 visitors per month and they pay for themselves with no problem, just from people clicking on the Google ads. Then the products sold lets me buy a nice bike and all the trimmings plus just built a new home and have not missed a payment in over three years.

So are they really needing money or just greedy?

late 12-26-08 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8079620)
I don't think they really need money being us the visitors to the web site puts in all the information for them. A domain name only cost about 7 dollars a year and unlimited web hosting on yahoo servers only cost about 12 dollars a month with a free domain name. Pay Pal credit card acceptance is free, and you only pay fees when you get a donation. I know there are other cost but with 10,000,000 (ten million) visitors per day they should have no problem with cash flow. They need to get rid of that Jet and those limos and sell about 10 of their 20 beach front homes.

I have 9 websites with about 6000 visitors per month and they pay for themselves with no problem, just from people clicking on the Google ads. Then the products sold lets me buy a nice bike and all the trimmings plus just built a new home and have not missed a payment in over three years.

So are they really needing money or just greedy?

They warehouse a staggering amount of information. They maintain server farms
all over. The farms have to be next to power plants and the obvious places they've already built on.

The next step is to build power plants largely just for the new server farms.
Their business is outgrowing their business model.

Personally, I see it as a needed service, like the highways. If we let if fail, replacing it will cost a pretty penny. And we would wind up replacing it.

cawoodwilly 12-26-08 06:02 PM

Yes I agree they have a big load and have a great product. We can make it with out it if we need to. Some one else will step in and fill the slot.

I know I should have not spoken. But how many Billions of dollars in bail out money should we give them? All I see any more is everyone with a hand out wanting free money. No one will give me free money. And to think they have the 8th most traveled website on the internet and have to beg.

Just one small ad on each of their millions of pages could bring in as much as a million dollars every day for them. They don't even have to do anything because Google changes the ads to match the information on the page. You may not even notice the ad was there, But when you seen it you would click on it because it was a link to the product you was reading about.

Anywhere from 4% to 18% of the visitors that come to a website click on the ads. So roughing 10% for them would be a million clicks a day at the lower end of .50 cents per click. Wow that is an easy half a million dollars per day. If they can not run a 23 employee business on 182 million dollars a year they don't need to be in business to start with.

I feel they should get with a new business plan or shut it down and let someone run it that knows what they are doing.

I just can't make myself feel sorry for them..

Falchoon 12-26-08 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8080552)
If they can not run a 23 employee business on 182 million dollars a year they don't need to be in business to start with.

I feel they should get with a new business plan or shut it down and let someone run it that knows what they are doing.

I just can't make myself feel sorry for them..

Do they really only have 23 employees? The amount of computing power needed to run Wiki would be huge, they would need more than 23 people just to look after the computers, let alone sift through all the info and (presumably) check and double check it and post it on the website.

Serendipper 12-26-08 06:22 PM

Ads don't belong in reference materials or libraries.

cawoodwilly 12-26-08 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falchoon (Post 8080576)
Do they really only have 23 employees? The amount of computing power needed to run Wiki would be huge, they would need more than 23 people just to look after the computers, let alone sift through all the info and (presumably) check and double check it and post it on the website.

I would think an IBM blade server should do it. A T1 line and a couple of people to keep it running and maybe a couple more play moderator and webmaster.

It should fit in a small two bedroom home easy with room left over.

cawoodwilly 12-26-08 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipper (Post 8080625)
Ads don't belong in reference materials or libraries.

Why not?

Membership fees or TAXES are the only other way.

Or they can just beg..

I feel like the bad guy here, :deadhorse2:

Serendipper 12-26-08 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8080659)
Why not?

Membership fees or TAXES are the only other way.

Or they can just beg..

I feel like the bad guy here, :deadhorse2:


No worries, I thought this was a P&R topic so this innocent looking sock I'm holding is actually full of batteries.:innocent:



But seriously, I don't expect to see ads in my public library, in my World Book, or on my wikipedia. It's distracting and not fitting for the nature of pure academic research and public resources.

What harm is there to donate to a public resource like PBS or wikipedia? None. Taxes and fees are not the only way. Begging in itself is not a bad thing. No shame from where I'm standing.

UnsafeAlpine 12-26-08 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8080659)
Why not?

Membership fees or TAXES are the only other way.

Or they can just beg..

I feel like the bad guy here, :deadhorse2:

I think the difference between a primarily publicly supported entity and a primarily corporate one is pretty obvious.

Public

Private

timmhaan 12-26-08 06:49 PM

i'd rather it be free of advertising.

x136 12-26-08 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipper (Post 8080625)
Ads don't belong in reference materials or libraries.

*nod* Of all of the many and varied places that advertising doesn't belong, those are pretty high on the list.

RubenX 12-26-08 07:24 PM

With the big amount of traffic they have, selling adds is not needed. They just need to sell the logs... Client's IP/Page Requested/Time Stamp. Not even have to use cookies. Marketing spyware cookies already on your PC could be used by market researchers to tie up your IP@TimeStamp and get an idea of what you were reading... Very sneaky, very wrong and very profitable.

RazorWind 12-26-08 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8080552)
I feel they should get with a new business plan or shut it down and let someone run it that knows what they are doing.

I just can't make myself feel sorry for them..

Here's the problem with this. You're approaching the problem from the standpoint of the smarmy pornsiter. The guy who has figured out how to milk the system of the internet to his advantage. No one trusts that guy because, frankly, he's not trustworthy. He'd pimp out his own mother if he thought there was profit to be made in it.

Wikipedia, on the other hand, pretty obviously wants to be viewed as a semi-legitimate source of information, which it generally is, but is not regarded as such by scholars. In order to make progress in the direction they want to go, they need to keep up their squeaky-clean altruistic sheen, which won't happen if you start having Google ads on every page, as their critics will (quite rightly) assert that this supposedly reliable source of information has been bought and paid for by advertisers.

Also, if you're running nine websites, you should know that running a high-traffic website is neither free nor cheap, and running a web application such as mediawiki is even more expensive and requires tons of high dollar maintenance, either by your own staff or the datacenter in which one colos one's servers, as is likely the case for Wikipedia, as it means they don't have to have employees all over the world - just servers.

Velo Vol 12-26-08 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubenX (Post 8080828)
With the big amount of traffic they have, selling adds is not needed. They just need to sell the logs.

What is the market value of these kind of logs? And doesn't that raise some of the same concerns (or additional ones) over running advertising?

RazorWind 12-26-08 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Velo Vol (Post 8081682)
What is the market value of these kind of logs? And doesn't that raise some of the same concerns (or additional ones) over running advertising?

Yes, it raises some of the same concerns. Even if they were totally straight up, they expose themselves to criticism if they start making most of their money from commercial enterprises that have an interest in what Wikipedias articles say about themselves and their competitors. I am almost certain that the perception within academia that they're a second rate source is something the Wikipedia managers would very much like to have go away, and that's not going to happen if word gets out that they've been bought and paid for by corporations.

IMO, their business model is generally the right one, they just need to be more creative with their fundraising.

timmhaan 12-27-08 09:18 AM

this is the main reason i don't use webmd. seems like a giant market for advertisers to hawk their drugs. look up depression, for example, and you'll see all kinda of ads for cymbalta. the whole thing is compromised by that. in fact, it's even hard to figure out what is an ad and what is content.

StrangeWill 12-27-08 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8079620)
I don't think they really need money being us the visitors to the web site puts in all the information for them. A domain name only cost about 7 dollars a year and unlimited web hosting on yahoo servers only cost about 12 dollars a month with a free domain name. Pay Pal credit card acceptance is free, and you only pay fees when you get a donation. I know there are other cost but with 10,000,000 (ten million) visitors per day they should have no problem with cash flow. They need to get rid of that Jet and those limos and sell about 10 of their 20 beach front homes.

I have 9 websites with about 6000 visitors per month and they pay for themselves with no problem, just from people clicking on the Google ads. Then the products sold lets me buy a nice bike and all the trimmings plus just built a new home and have not missed a payment in over three years.

So are they really needing money or just greedy?

You don't really understand large scale websites or really a realistic approach to the IT sector do you?

Anyway with 6000 users paying for bandwidth I'd call shenanigans, as in you're asking them to click, especially saying 4% of them click.

Also with advertisements comes the obligation to not allow bad things to be written about them in their Wikipedia, a major conflict.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falchoon (Post 8080576)
Do they really only have 23 employees? The amount of computing power needed to run Wiki would be huge, they would need more than 23 people just to look after the computers, let alone sift through all the info and (presumably) check and double check it and post it on the website.

The 23 employees are support staff, and I doubt ever edit articles, that is for the community, they maintain the servers, provide hardware upgrades, software upgrades for upscaling the database while keeping sub-second response times. (See my link below to see the actual scale of Wikipedia, maintaining gigabytes of database, along with history, and provide sub-second searches on all of it is a huge computing task, this isn't a basic PHP website using a MySQL back end where you can just run a query and get a result in 0.001 seconds).

Quote:

Originally Posted by cawoodwilly (Post 8080626)
I would think an IBM blade server should do it. A T1 line and a couple of people to keep it running and maybe a couple more play moderator and webmaster.

It should fit in a small two bedroom home easy with room left over.

A T1 would be nowheres near enough bandwidth, let alone paying for commercial lines in residential zones are way more expensive, let alone one blade server. On top of that your typical home doesn't have a decent enough AC system to deal with the amount of heat generated.


Here is the wake up call:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers

And this:
https://wikitech.leuksman.com/view/Server_roles


Learn about large scale computing before claiming that they should just buy a blade server or get a yahoo account. =\

cawoodwilly 12-30-08 08:38 PM

LOL I see that I got this one going pretty good.

Just to resolve this,

Even if I do this for a living and did make well over $400,000 from one of the 9 websites in 2008.

You are right and I'm wrong.

The last place I worked had over 14,000 employees world wide, Hundreds of computers connected to the system all the time and stored over 50 years of data. This kind of load is more then a quick data check like on an internet website. It is hard core data entry 24 hours a day. I think about 23 workers or less is all they had for the Information Systems / IT department, Most were techs to fix PCs, Only two or three worked on the main frame and network.

I know it don't take that much.

But again you are right and I'm wrong.

I had a great bike ride today, So I'm happy....

cawoodwilly 07-06-10 02:37 PM

Hey dude,

Here is the wake up call:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers


The above is a quote from your message and so you know, That is a blade server, and looks to have 20 or 21 blades in it. The 5 units looks to be about 12 foot from left to right.. My-Oh-My what power they must put out.. What is that $100K investment, maybe $200K max? Looking back just makes me think, what a joke this conversation was and had nothing to do with bikes.

mikeybikes 07-06-10 02:44 PM

Zombie thread!

(p.s. If you did what you say for a living, you'd know that a T1 is nowhere near enough bandwidth...)

StupidlyBrave 07-06-10 03:57 PM

^^Interestingly, they are using Nagios to monitor health.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:54 PM.