-
I just assumed that would be easy, that you would have one instance with no actual content. It just fetches the wikipedia article with the same name, directly from the wikipedia website. I guess I didn't really think about it.
-
I guess that's a design choice. Looking at different ways similar issues have been solved already...
How does wikipedia decide that the same article is available in different languages? I guess there is a database of links which has to be maintained.
Alternatively, it could assume that articles are the same if they have the same name, like in your example where "Mountain" can have an article on a poetry instance and on a geography instance, but the software treats them as the same article.
Wikipedia can understand that "Rep of Ireland" = "Republic of Ireland". So I guess there is a look-up-table saying that these two names refer to the same thing.
Then, wikipedia can also understand cases where articles can have the same name but be unrelated. Like RIC (paramilitary group) is not the same as RIC (feature of a democracy).
I do think, if each Ibis instance is isolated, it won't be much different from having many separate wiki websites. When the software automatically links you to the same information on different instances, that's when the idea becomes really interesting and valuable.
This is a great project. I had the same idea myself, and posted about it, but never did anything about it! It's great that people like you are here, with the creativity, and the motivation and skills to do this work.
I think this project is as necessary as Wikipedia itself.
The criticisms in these comments are mostly identical to the opinion most people had about Wikipedia when it started - the it would become a cesspool of nonsense and misinformation. That it was useless and worthless when encyclopaedias already exist.
Wikipedia was the first step in broadening what a source if authoritative information can be. It in fact created richer and more truthful information than was possible before, and enlightened the world. Ibis is a necessary second step on the same path.
It will be most valuable for articles like Tieneman square, or the Gilets Jaunes, where there are sharply different perspectives on the same matter, and there will never be agreement. A single monolithic Wikipedia cannot speak about them. Today, wiki gives one perspective and calls it the truth. This was fine in the 20th century when most people believed in simple truths. They were told what to think by single sources. They never left their filter bubbles. This is not sustainable anymore.
To succeed and change the world, this project must do a few things right.
-
The default instance should just be a mirror of Wikipedia. This is the default source of information on everything, so it would be crazy to omit it. Omitting it means putting yourself in competition with it, and you will lose. By encompassing it, the information in Ibis is from day 1 greater then wiki. Then Ibis will just supersede wiki.
-
There should be a sidebar with links to the sane article on other instances. So someone reading about trickle down economics on right wing instance, he can instantly switch to the same article on a left wing wiki and read the other side of it. That's the feature that will make it worthwhile for people.
-
It should look like Wikipedia. For familiarity. This will help people transition.
That's probably what will happen in the end. Using old familiar idea, because it is familiar.
But that's not what I'm doing here. I'm interested in new and more effective plans, even if they are not familiar and are unlikely to be used for that reason.
How could that work, on a practical level? Would it work better than what I have proposed?
The issue of better regulation for dangerous breeds of dogs is starting to get a bit serious right now in Ireland. This is one where the solution is simple, but might not be easy for governments and councils to see.
***
Many people cannot control their dogs. But those people still bring their dogs to public places. They don't understand that this is a problem.
They don't have the discipline to train their dogs. Or they don't have the time or interest. And nobody is forcing them to do so.
People propose many solutions, like banning certain dangerous breeds, enforcing muzzling, licensing, etc. These solutions are familiar, but wrong. They punish educated dogs and savage ones alike.
Being a good dog or a bad dog does not depend on breed. It is true that some breeds are harder to train, and some breeds are more dangerous when untrained. But any dog of any breed can be raised to be good or bad, safe or dangerous.
***
Dogs must be banned from all public spaces, unless muzzled and leashed, or unless they have passed a test. They get a collar of a specific colour and design when they pass.
There could be various levels of exam. The dogs which pass higher levels are allowed more freedoms.
For example:
- Does not react aggressively to children
- Does not react aggressively to other dogs
- Can be pet by strangers
- Obeys instructions to return to owner, when off lead
- Can resist eating food left out, when directed to
- Can resist chasing a small animal like a cat or pigeon, when directed to
No dog is required to do any test, but tests are required to go certain places or do certain things. For example level 5 might be required to enter a picnic area. You could imagine pubs and shops allowing dogs which have level 3. Level 2 might be required to be allowed off the lead in a park. Level 1 to go outside without a muzzle.
Because the collars are visible, the rules are enforceable.
There are a few things that need to be decided. Whether puppies should have collars with adjustable size. Whether the collar should be non-removable by the owner. Whether the collar should be generic, or have identification on it, like owner's name or microchip ID number.
Thanks, internet stranger. I'm glad to hear that you think this has some value.
All the details are up for debate and possible improvement. But in this first draft of the idea:
Will people be forced to fill it in every year?
Only if they want to decide where their money goes.
Will they fill it in at all?
If they don't fill it in, the fee goes to the RTE.
Will there be a default selection? Like all to RTÉ, or maybe an even split between all options?
All to RTE.
If people don’t have to make a selection every year, will they just choose once and never update or change it because it’s a hassle?
That's a good idea. You could have an option to inform the revenue of your preference just once, and it will be recorded forever, or until you change it. That way, people don't have to fill out a tax return every year.
I only heard about this because I know someone who is thinking of availing of it.
Vacant Property Refurbishment Grant
This could be a big part of the reason for the housing shortage, because so many homes are being left empty in order to avail of this grant.
The RTE needs money from the public each year to run. But
- Direct funding by the government gives the government too much influence over content.
- Funding from the licence fee is not secure because many people don't want to pay, since they discovered all the money-laundering and theft going on in RTE.
- Advertising does not make the RTE enough money.
The funding model should also give the RTE an incentive to behave better in the future. It must be a source that can shrink in proportion to RTE's continuing misbehaviour.
The best way is to add a an extra charge to everyone's annual income tax bill. It could be 50€ per taxpayer, to replace the existing 160€ per household. People who don't pay tax don't pay the charge. So this is more progressive than the TV licence fee was.
On the tax declaration form, there is a multiple choice. The taxpayer can choose whether his fee should go to the RTE or somewhere else more deserving. If he ticks several boxes, the fee will be split between several beneficiaries. The choices could be, for example
- RTE
- Medicins sans frontieres
- Vincent de Paul
- A subsidy for theatre companies
- Funding for artists and musicians
- A fund for free open-source software developers
For the last two, figuring out a way to fairly distribute the money could be tricky, but still worthwhile.
There will also be an option to increase the payment to the chosen cause, to 100€ or 200€.
The blue LED was supposed to be impossible—until a young engineer proposed a moonshot idea. Head to https://brilliant.org/veritasium to start your free 30-day trial, and the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription. If you’re looking for a molecular modeling kit, try Snatoms, a k...
Can special lightbulbs end the next pandemic before it starts?
For private business the tickets are to fund the business. But for public transport they are never expected to cover the costs of the business.
It is run as a public service, not to make money. The function of tickets is to prevent overcrowding.
That's why in well designed systems, the price is different at rush hour, and for high traffic routes and times.
I don't know anything about montpellier specifically though.
It looks like the current government will not take action on the urgent issues of our time. The most urgent is climate change but it's not the only one.
Any maybe no future government will take action either. It's the nature of our political system that governments ignore long-term problems.
There is only one way to force them into action.
We must find a single issue with overwhelmingly popular support. Then we organise a national strike over it.
It must be a specific actionable realistic issue. For example
- A fair sales tax on all products which produce carbon dioxide or methane, in proportion to their global warming effect per kilo. This would include concrete, beef, fertilizer, fossil fuels, steel. The money shall be used to fund a cut in the general VAT rate. So these products rise in price and everything else, every less polluting product, drops in price.
- A boycott on Israel until it grants non-Jews in territories it controls equal civil rights.
- A ban on vulture funds owning housing.
First we need a public figure, or anyone influential or persuasive, to spearhead this action.
Who can do it?
It looks like the current government will not take action on the urgent issues of our time. The most urgent is climate change but it's not the only one.
Any maybe no future government take action either. It's the nature of our political system that governments ignore long-term problems.
There is only one way to force the issue.
We must find a single issue with overwhelmingly popular support. Then we organise a national strike over it.
It must be a specific actionable realistic issue. For example
- A fair sales tax on all products which produce carbon dioxide or methane, in proportion to their global warming effect per kilo. This would include concrete, beef, fertilizer, fossil fuels, steel. The money shall be used to fund a cut in the general VAT rate. So these products rise in price and everything else, every less polluting product, drops in price.
- A boycott on Israel until it grants non-Jews in territories it controls equal civil rights.
- A ban on vulture funds owning housing.
First we need a public figure, or anyone influential or persuasive, to spearhead this action.
Who can do it?
He was working three full-time jobs at Meta, IBM, and Tinder. His bosses didn't know.
There is democracy in several member states of the USA. It could trickle up. There are mechanisms to make that happen. I think is even an ongoing campaign to replace the electoral college. I forget the details now.
actually i have no idea where i am! the community is called [ ]. the sidebar sounds like total gibberish. this is a place i don't understand.
what does this even mean?!
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal. No anti-natilasm posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
because the system selects for people like him. in a working democracy people like him would be licking stamps, or in a nursing home. you can't change anything by changing the man, only by changing the system.
It's not his fault though. If you could sack your president and elect a new one tomorrow, the new one would do the same. Your electoral system ensures it. You need electoral reform to have a chance of fixing anything.
It's an interesting the gradual technical changes, from bullets to gas to bombs to depravation of water. They must measure big improvements in efficiency, measured in number of deaths per dollar and per day. Imagine of a report from a recent study on this got leaked!
polar bears. it's the only animal that likes to eat people. daily life is just too safe and dull.
It is useful to have lots of stupid laws. It makes people feel powerless and frustrated. It means the police can always find excuses to persecute you.
The technicalities of the individual laws are not important. It's the psychological effect of the whole body of laws on a people.
Are the ministers completely ignorant of economics, or are they running a racket to transfer money from people to developers?
The October 7 attack was a shock to the system in Israel that made clear there is no military solution in Palestine.
Also this https://research.uh.edu/the-big-idea/what-went-wrong/behind-closed-drawers-the-file-drawer-effect/
Why would you think it's difficult to keep a secret that big? It happens all the time. Look at all the secrets that have been kept for decades before they were leaked. Then think about how many more there must be that will never be discovered.
I think leftist organisations make an effort to be open. Keeping secrets would be against their philosophy.
Yes you couldn't change something so widely used. Look what happened with python 3.
Fortunately there's already a tradition among Git users of building a UI on top of the git UI. My project is just a slightly better version of those. It lays a simple sensible interface on top of the chaotic Git interface.
Three researchers have found a long-sought way to pull information from large databases secretly, moving us closer to fully private internet searches.
Git is a great invention but it has a few design flaws. There are too many ways to confuse it or break it, using commands that look correct, or just forgetting something. I ended up writing simple wrapper script codebase to fix it. Since then no problems.
This is the most tenuous point. Maybe I should have omitted it, because the argument is just as convincing without it.
It's the ideda that drug use is partially a symptom of widespread depression. You've seen the effect where building a skate park reduces petty crime and suicides and drug use and other mental problems. Improving people's society improves people's lives which reduces rates of misery which reduces things like drug use. It's an observation that is widely made, and makes sense, but I'm not sure how thoroughly it has been researched. Forcing developers to include in their developments things like skate parks, employment, open space, cafes and pubs, etc, reduces rates of all problem behaviour.
Why can't employers find enough people to do the work of society? There aren't enough people available to work as teachers, vets, bus drivers, etc. All these common, essential jobs are going unfilled in large numbers, leading to problems in the functioning of society as a whole.
And this despite rising poverty levels forcing ever more women into the workforce, and high immigration rates increasing the relative number of people of working age.
So what are the adults of Ireland all doing, that they're not available to do these jobs?
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-lfs/labourforcesurveyquarter22021/employment/
Well for a start, 15% are working in "motor vehicles". This sounds too high. I'm sure this industry does not need so many people. It's the same number as work in "human health".
How can this number be reduced, to allow more people to work in more valuable jobs?
-
Extra tax on high earning jobs like "motor vehicle" tradesmen? This could be used to fund higher salaries for jobs like driving buses. If the market is thus manipulated so essential jobs pay better, people will switch jobs and the problem is solved.
-
Promote cars which are more durable and require less frequent maintenance. Punish the sale of new cars and especially cars which cannot easily be maintained by the owner, or whose parts cannot easily and cheaply be acquired by normal people.
Encouraging electric bikes and electric cars will not help. I mean it won't help in general, but it especially won't help with this problem. Electric bikes and electric cars require more frequent maintenance and replacement than conventional cars. It is possible to design electric vehicles which are far more durable that petrol ones, because of technology advantages. But that will not happen until it is promoted through taxation, as above.
- The need for vehicles in general is proportional to how badly towns are planned. Housing, jobs, and amenities and leisure need to be placed near each other. The placement should be enforced by planning law. This reduces commuting distances and increases usage of "mobilités douces".
So only #3 is the real solution. Through a happy coincidence, this is also the solution to most of society's other problems, like the housing crisis, drug use and bad behaviour and petty crime, global warming, etc.
Although #3 is simple and obvious, it requires critical thinking which the current government is not capable of. So it is worth remembering for after the next election.
The qualities of our experience seem impossible to describe scientifically, but maybe we’re just not thinking about them right.
> with artistic training or brain stimulation we could look beneath the intrinsic nature of qualia to see the raw associations that make them up, just as a musician hears the individual components in what, to most fans, is a wall of sound. “It should be possible to experience parts of those underlying structures directly, just as we can learn to experience the individual overtones of a sound,”
> The proposition, then, is that redness, pain, and the other qualities of experience are a blurred view of a dense thicket of relations. Red is red not because it just is, but because of a vast number of associations that we have learned or been born with.
Someone asked me what the government should be doing differently about the housing crisis. I ended up with this list. So it's not exhaustive.
I think all of these are necessary to have a functioning housing market which (1) allows people to live in peace (2) builders to work productively to produce useful housing (3) stop investors gouging people (4) allows people to easily move house when they need to (5) allows people to choose to rent or house as suits their needs without huge costs.
But if any one of these is enacted it will tangible improve many people's lives. Some of these I have already written about before in more depth. Others I will write about soon. I understand that most readers won't see the value of these without a lot more explanation.
- zoning offices vs housing in areas which lack them
- incentivise appts w amenities instead of big houses (planning law depends on local need for cheap housing)
- big tax per land area (or per house) & big UBI/subsidy for each resident/person
- big vacancy tax, using the register of people's addresses instead of self-certification. owners unwilling to pay must forfeit the property to the state.
- remove costs of moving (stamp duty, seller does survey, govt does conveyancing)
- price control (like capital gains tax / rental windfall tax)
- tenants rights (ban on no fault evictions, sell the house with the tenants, tenants first right to buy, inspections, whistleblowing hotline, etc)
- ban businesses owning housing (exemptions for universities etc who can get licences)
- Ban on anyone owning >2 houses
- open land register - know about vacancy rates and amenities/jobs/houses ratio
Supporters of Scottish rugby, Welsh, Italian and Irish all seem to be for England. But in fact, they responded to the question "Which team do you want to see lose?". "The 6 Nations tournament, this is not so much that you want to see win, but rather that we want to see lose." The BBC banned the ad f...
![[HUMOR] Six Nations 2012 clip trailer banned on BBC Sport](https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/64824387-9287-40d9-9aaa-e2d7da8ccbe8.webp?format=webp&thumbnail=256)
Hit and runs have been in the news a lot lately. More people need dashcams. But most people have no urgent need to buy one, and they are hassle to install.
This is an easy one for the government to fix. Decree that every garage must offer to do dashcam installation during routine services. Optionally, decree that they must do it for no extra charge.
When a good portion of people take up this option, there will be a critical mass of carmeras on the roads. Hit and runs will become very risky. When people know there is a chance the accident has been recorded, they will not run.
Uniquely, this solution does not enable ubiquitous surveillance by the state, because dashcams are not internet-connected.
It will also be useful that other types of accidents and events will be recorded. People will hesitate before doing anything violent or illegal in the street, when footage can be easily sent to the gardaí or the media. This includes dangerous not-illegal driving, searching for missing people etc.
This is simple, free, and necessary. It must be done now.
Heat pumps are relatively scarce in the UK – but that could be about to change.
