Wikipedia has a lot of money, along with a valuable dataset (for AI); it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. As we saw with OpenAI, it is difficult to keep a non-profit dedicated to its public benefit mission when it has something of tantalizing value.

▲

greyface- 29 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> a valuable dataset

It's CC-BY-SA/GFDL, and the underlying copyright belongs to the editors that wrote it. There is no commercial value in reselling access, and WMF does not have the right to relicense it.

▲

kennywinker 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it.

So, the people who helped create the valuable dataset are “rent seekers” now? Must be using a different definition of rent seeking than any i’ve heard.

▲

nickff 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The employees of the Wikipedia foundation did not create the dataset, though they definitely contributed to the infrastructure behind it. Sam Altman (and the OpenAI employees) contributed even more to OpenAI's continuing success (and that of their industry). Both groups are still rent-seekers, as they are attempting to profit off a market position which was developed under different auspices.

	▲	Apocryphon 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Did you see the subthread that the motivation behind this union does not seem to be collective bargaining over compensation, but in response to management's decision over personnel issues: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48665062 Indeed, the OP does not mention increased pay at all, but rather "concerns over transparency, trust, and the organisation’s future direction." You can go ahead and call that rhetoric, but you are also reading in intentions that do not seem to match reports from the ground.

▲

oh_no 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Foundation didn't create the dataset, just the framework for volunteers to do the work.