logoalt Hacker News

lifeisstillgoodyesterday at 5:32 PM9 repliesview on HN

I completely understand marking the software that controls drinking water as critical infrastructure- but at some point a state based cyber attack that just wipes wikipedia off the net is deeply damaging to our modern society’s ability to agree on common facts …

Just now thought “if Wikipedia vanished what would it mean … and it’s not on the level of safe drinking water, but it is a level.


Replies

GuB-42yesterday at 6:41 PM

> if Wikipedia vanished what would it mean …

That someone would need to restore some backups, and in the meantime, use mirrors.

Seriously, not that big of a deal. I don't know how many copies of Wikipedia are lying around but considering that archives are free to download, I guess a lot. And if you count text-only versions of the English Wikipedia without history and talk pages, it is literally everywhere as it is a common dataset for natural language processing tasks. It is likely to be the most resilient piece of data of that scale in existence today.

The only difficulty in the worst case scenario would be rebuilding a new central location and restarting the machinery with trusted admins, editors, etc... Any of the tech giants could probably make a Wikipedia replacement in days, with all data restored, but it won't be Wikipedia.

__turbobrew__yesterday at 6:59 PM

You can download the entirety of wikipedia and store it in your own offline immutable backup.

show 1 reply
tempaccount5050yesterday at 6:50 PM

What you're suggesting is literally impossible. There are plenty of mirrors and random people that download the thing in its entirety. The entire planet would have to be nuked for that to be possible.

xandriusyesterday at 7:52 PM

Don't worry, I personally have an offline backup of the English on my phone.

Aperockyyesterday at 5:43 PM

All persistent data should have backup.

It's not a high bar.

lyu07282yesterday at 5:47 PM

There are so many mirrors anyway and trivial to get a local copy? What is much more concerning is government censorship and age verification/digital id laws where what articles you read becomes part of your government record the police sees when they pull you over.

CaptainNegativeyesterday at 6:13 PM

> but at some point a state based cyber attack that just wipes wikipedia off the net is deeply damaging to our modern society’s ability to agree on common facts

Haven't we hit that point already with bad faith (and potentially government-run) coordinated editing and voting campaigns, as both Wales and Sanger have been pointing out for a while now?

See, for example,

* Sanger: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/Nine_Theses

* Wales: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaza_genocide/Archive_22#...

* PirateWires: https://www.piratewires.com/p/how-wikipedia-is-becoming-a-ma...

show 1 reply
streetfighter64yesterday at 6:18 PM

If you're using wikipedia to "agree on common facts" I think you might have bigger problems...

show 1 reply