Prominent Republicans are trying to fight "bias" online.

This week, two prominent Republicans, Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky) and Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina), both of whom play influential roles in the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, announced plans to probe into everybody’s favorite digital encyclopedia. In a letter that Comer and Mace sent to the Wikimedia Foundation (which helps run the site), they asked for internal documents that might show evidence of bad actors who had commandeered Wikipedia for their own ends. The letter, dated Aug. 27th, states that the committee is

investigating the efforts of foreign operations and individuals at academic institutions subsidized by U.S. taxpayer dollars to influence U.S. public opinion. We seek your assistance in obtaining documents and communications regarding individuals (or specific accounts) serving as Wikipedia volunteer editors who violated Wikipedia platform policies as well as your own efforts to thwart intentional, organized efforts to inject bias into important and sensitive topics.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    1·
    1 day ago

    ahh the next hilarious stretch.

    yes storage is soo expensive nowadays all those people sacrificing their precious storage! most peoples laptops have hundreds of GBs of storage they will never actually utilize… and thats just on crappy retail boxes.

    youre clearly struggling to find some reason why people shouldnt be doing this, but i have yet to hear a single reason thats actually detrimental to anyone but those whose egos are tied the to contributor metadata that might get lost.

    again, not a single reason this data shouldnt be replicated.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      2·
      1 day ago

      i have yet to hear a single reason thats actually detrimental to anyone but those whose egos are tied the to contributor metadata that might get lost.

      So you’re not even doing a full backup?

      Complete waste of time.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        1·
        1 day ago

        right, because you lack context. your world is very tiny. your parochial views limit any cogent arguments.

        you have this notion that humanity will always exist in its present form. theres only one constant; everything changes.

        your assumptions to the contrary are telling, as well as the nod to the fact you care as much about the editors as the content.