Transport wiki >>> IG

If you use Chrome or Brave, there is absolutely no need to utilize Wikipedia ever again. All you need to do is add the Transporter extension and you'll automatically be transported to Infogalactic every time you click on a Wikipedia link.

This extension allows the user to move between Wiki and IG.

Auto-redirects from Wikipedia to Infogalactic's version of that page (whether entering via a link or the address bar).

Clicking the extension button shuttles you back to the Wiki version and disables auto-redirect for that tab, and clicking again takes you back to Infogalactic. If you navigate away, on that tab, to some website outside either Wiki or IG, it'll reset the behaviour back to auto-redirecting. 

Behaviour is also bound to the tab in which the clicking took place. If you click the button, thus disabling auto-redirect, and open a new tab, that new tab will obey the default redirect behaviour, i.e. taking you to Infogalactic if you visit Wikipedia.

There is also a Firefox version.

Stop whining about Wikipedia, conservatives

And start using Infogalactic:

Last year, Larry Correia fisked a condescending piece of… writing vomited by some screeching social justice simian who got offended because someone shared a meme on the Internet advising poor people to cook at home and instead of buying fast food. Two days later, someone edited Larry’s Wikipedia page so that the very first thing it said was that he was a White Supremacist Author. The page was also edited to say that Larry wanted his “worthless and self published fantasy dreck” nominated for a Hugo Award. “The funny thing was,” Larry told me when I spoke to him about the incident, “I was the one defending the intelligence and dignity of poor people of any ethnic background, and the rich white liberal was trying to say they were too dumb to boil water.”

Baen authors Tom Kratman, Sarah Hoyt, and John Ringo have also been targeted (the flaccid attempts against Ringo will go over about as well as the pantshittingly inept ones against Larry – that is to say they will be a fail), ostensibly for their refusal to act in accordance with the screeching social justice simian diktats and soothe their chafed labia by acknowledging that mayonnaise is a gender.

Reasons for the deletion range from petty to outright unhinged, claiming primary sources are insufficient and even questioning the military service of Mike Williamson and Tom Kratman! Apparently, even an article in Stars and Stripes about veterans forging successful careers in science fiction is insufficient evidence that an author is significant enough to warrant a Wikipedia page and Baen publishing – a giant in science fiction and fantasy that’s been in existence more than three decades – is apparently a “vanity press with little editorial/production standards that can’t even keep straight what year they awarded one of their fake awards.”

But really – like everything else they do – their efforts to destroy the reputations of their political enemies stem from their feelings of inadequacy compared with creators who not only produce literature people want to buy and read, but are infinitely more successful at their chosen art than these squealing mediocrities are at whatever it is that they choose as their so-called “professions” (often involving begging for money on Patreon and serving overpriced beverages at whatever hipster coffee house allows them to wear torn Che t-shirts and neckbeards as a uniform).

“To an extent, it’s like erasing historical figures,” Sarah Hoyt told me. “They try to erase us because our accomplishments make them feel theirs are tiny. It’s stompy-foot, fuck fuck games of people too stupid to excel at their supposed profession,” she added.

The conservatives, the Williamsons, Hoyts, and Ringos of the world, are endlessly surprised to discover that their enemies actually hate them, aren't going to play fair, and aren't going to heed dire warning #863,527 that someday, someone who almost certainly isn't them, is going to do something about it.

There will come a time when normal people will have had enough. 

I've been hearing those dire warnings to the Left from conservatives since the 1980s. I've learned not to pay any attention to them, and I'm pretty sure the Left has concluded that they have nothing to worry about on that score.

Sarah Hoyt adds: "IT’S HAPPENING MUCH FASTER THAN I EXPECTED."

But it was always happening all along, she just didn't want to have to actually do anything substantive about it. One commenter points out the obvious: There’s one guy actually doing something about it, and a bunch of the people named in the article have disavowed him, because he didn’t wait until now to fight back. 

Exactly. So FFS, stop whining, stop crying, stop issuing dire warnings, and just use Infogalactic instead. If you're a public figure, get your Verified page and use it to set the record straight. And relax, it's not about me, I'm only one of literally hundreds of people who helped make it happen and help keep it going.


UPDATE: The gammas all butthurt about the fact that I don't let them snark away snarkily about me on my personal blog, on my personal YouTube channel, or in my house are too self-centered and stupid to observe the obvious fact that the rules are very different for my personal sites than for the games, technologies, and public sites I design. If I don't like you, that's a perfectly legitimate reason to never permit you on my site or in my house. But my personal preferences are not a legitimate reason to deny anyone access to a site that purports to be for everyone.

Introducing SocialGalactic

Twitter is SJW-controlled territory. Gab is a hellhole of defamation and Nazi trolls. So, after many of Infogalactic's supporters asked us to provide something on the social media front, the InfoGalactic team joined forces with OneWay and created a new social media alternative: SocialGalactic.

We're presently in Beta. Free accounts have 140-character posts and 1MB storage, which is just enough for an avatar and a header. We'll soon be making Pro accounts available at three levels, which will provide posts of 200, 480, and 999 characters, and image storage up to 500MB. Sign up and check it out!

For the Burn Unit members who are already on the site, please note that it has been updated to version 1.1.0. Log in and log out to make sure that you're running the latest version, which includes:

1)  Badges for member levels
2)  Character limits based on member levels
3)  Mobile improvements
4)  Moderator controls
5)  Notifications counters
6)  Position of post you are relying to in modal.
7)  X closes DM modal.
8)  Bio in dark mode
9)  Post counters on home page.
10)  Online user counter on home page.

Please keep in mind that SocialGalactic is NOT a free speech zone. Don't be vulgar, don't post nudes or obscene material, and behave in a civil manner. If you want spicy memes and bantz, you've already got Gab. Don't bother asking for more image storage for free accounts, as we've identified that as a primary attack vector by trolls and monkey-wrenchers and we're more likely to reduce the image storage than increase it.

1MB is NOT a bug

If you are experimenting with (the thing that shall not be named but will be announced Friday), the 1MB limit on image storage is most certainly NOT a bug. Free accounts get 1MB, which is just enough for an avatar and a header, and not very much more.

More importantly, this approach allows us to defang a major attack vector utilized by anonymous trolls, serial harassers, and monkey-wrenchers on social media sites.

One more thing. If you are an Infogalactic supporter - and thank you very much, all of you - you need to email me BOTH your @name and your support level. I may write 900-page epic fantasy novels without an outline, but nevertheless, I am entirely incapable of remembering every single supporter's precise support level on the basis if their email account. Telling me "my name is X" is great, but it does not tell me whether you are a Bronze, Silver, or Gold supporter.

The support badges and additional text limits are expected to arrive before we announce publicly on Friday.

UPDATE: our payment processor is suddenly taking belated issue with our subscription model because it is technically on a different site, so we have taken down the products from the store while we resolve the matter. If you are already a Burn Unit member, please continue to provide me with your username and support level in order to have your status upgraded.

Burn Unit 2.0

Infogalactic is pleased to announce that it is now possible to join the Burn Unit and support the Planetary Knowledge Core through the Arkhaven store. Three levels of subscription are available, Bronze, Silver, and Gold, and all three come with enhanced features and capabilities on our new SocialGalactic system, to which Alpha access will be announced this week to all Burn Unit and Brainstorm members.

We're also working on providing a coupon to a discounted Burn Unit t-shirt at Crypto.Fashion.

Please note that if you are already a member of the Burn Unit, there is absolutely no need to switch over unless you prefer to use your credit card instead of Paypal. All current members of the Burn Unit will receive the same access to SocialGalactic as the new members.

In answer to anticipated questions, yes, we will soon be able to offer support for the Darkstream and Voxiversity through the Arkhaven store, although I have to see about delivering the promised benefits to the existing supporters before setting that up. We are also working on an Audible-style system of purchasing audiobooks, but that is turning out to be more complicated if we do not wish to have a system that is not entirely manual.

Thank you for your staunch support of the Planetary Knowledge Core. In an age of endless historical revision and SJW memory-holing, we believe it is a vital tool for the preservation of the history and knowledge of Western civilization. Please note that by doing so, you are not only supporting the technology fronts, but are also helping provide strong infrastructural independence to Castalia House and Arkhaven as well.

Metaphor

From Steve Sailer's site:

If you see a forest in Ethiopia, you know there is very likely to be a church in the middle, says Alemayehu Wassie. …

These small but fertile oases — which number around 35,000 and are dotted across the country — are some of the last remaining scraps of the tall, lush natural forests that once covered Ethiopia, and which, along with their biodiversity, have all but disappeared.

Much of the nation’s forestland has been sacrificed to agriculture to feed the country’s mushrooming population — at more than 100 million, it is the world’s 12th largest. Deforestation was particularly encouraged during the country’s period of communism, in 1974–91, when the government nationalized the land, including the large estates of the church, and distributed it to people who converted swathes to farmland. Just 5% of the country is now covered in forest, down from 45% in the early twentieth century.

Serving as an oasis is going to be our job with regards to knowledge, particularly religious and philosophical tradition in the West. Why do you think I prioritized Infogalactic over more potentially lucrative projects? Did you truly think I didn't know there was considerably more money in clones of profitable corporate projects than in one of a non-profit?

What the Infogalactic team and the Burn Unit are doing matters, quite possibly more than anything else we are doing.

Yellow Vest deplatformings

Big Social is apparently attempting to help the French government clamp down on the Gilets Jaunes. I've heard that they are getting deplatformed left and right by Twitter and Facebook. Fortunately, there are alternatives coming, and very soon.

Burn Unit, you're all going to be given the opportunity to alpha test Infogalactic's new Twitter alternative VERY soon. If there are features you would like to see, please share them here. And it will NOT be a free speech zone, we are going to clamp down ruthlessly on the Alt-Retards and adult content trolls who destroyed the Gab community. It's going to be a clean speech zone, so if you want to pass naked pictures back and forth or engage in bantz, you'll have to do it somewhere else.

Why Infogalactic matters

Wikipedia, as you would expect, is whitewashing the Sarah Jeong page:

The BBC, which is generally considered a WP:RS around these parts, reports:

The New York Times has defended a new member of its editorial board who wrote racist tweets about white people.[1]
I fail to see why this would not be included in the article. Cheers to all, XavierItzm (talk) 22:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

*** @XavierItzm: I have changed your comment, since the BBC changed the article today. For anyone wondering, the BBC used to say "racist" but now says "inflammatory". You can see somewhere below where I criticize this decision by the BBC, but if they changed it, we have to respect that. wumbolo ^^^ 16:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I've reverted this Orwellian change. Changing someone else's comment on a talk page is not acceptable.2600:1012:B147:F1EA:F559:8E27:8070:B4CB (talk) 09:32, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
I don't see anyone disagreeing that the tweets are in fact racist. At the very least, we could insert a sentence that says: "Sarah Jeong become the subject of widespread criticism in the media in early August 2018 when, upon her hiring by the New York Times Editorial Board, it was discovered that she had posted a series of racist Twitter messages disparaging white people." I don't think any of that is disputed in any way at this point.Ikjbagl (talk) 23:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Support inclusion of your sentence as proposed and using the BBC as source. Remember, the page has been locked up and a condition has been imposed that consensus on the sentence and source must be reached. XavierItzm (talk) 23:24, 2 August 2018 (UTC) Whereas I still think the above contribution would have been fine, its simple one-sentence statement of fact was never greenlighted by the powers that be and instead got derailed by suggestions of having an entire paragraph. So now I support an alternate proposal below. Cheers to all. XavierItzm (talk) 06:31, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Just adding that my response here could be used to add two or three more sources to back up that the criticism was "widespread", with no fewer than 10 major news organizations reporting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sarah_Jeong#I_think_that_the_controversy_of_Jeong's_Tweets_should_be_mentioned%2E Ikjbagl (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Agreed that additional sources could be added later. However, let's not muddy the waters and see if consensus can be reached. XavierItzm (talk) 00:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Support sentence proposed Conveys what occurred concisely, with the article in the BBC I think its nigh impossible to describe the event as not noteworthy. SWL36 (talk) 00:27, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Regarding noteworthiness, the story is now on the Front Page of BBC.com/news, archive link here https://web.archive.org/web/20180803003558/https://www.bbc.com/news Ikjbagl (talk) 00:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Oppose per the above stated reasons for waiting to decide whether this should be included at all, and if yes per the sources, then how it should be characterized. We remain WP:NOTNEWS. We look at how a group of sources deal with a topic; decide if it merits inclusion in an encyclopedic account of, in this case, the subject's biography; then summarize the significant viewpoint or viewspoints. Reiterating the BBC's version is what news aggregation sites do. We're not that. Innisfree987 (talk) 01:40, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree with the not news point about Wikipedia, but I disagree with your characterization. All of the reputable sources linked so far deal with the subject in the same way. This single news event is more notable by Wikipedia's own (secondary-source based) standards than the rest of this person's career. The other secondary source mentions of her up to this point have all been in blogs, University blogs or lesser known websites (though she was cited by Forbes), and she now has an article on every major news website related to this incident. She has also had a multitude more edits to her page in the past day than she has had in her career. Waiting to see if the event "becomes" notable makes less sense when the event is already more notable than the rest of her page so far constructed. Ikjbagl (talk) 01:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, I sure would like to work on expanding the rest of it but unfortunately I'll have to do so by edit request for now! Meanwhile. The number of edits has no bearing, really. We don't make decisions based on popularity. Other points: the term "racist" is definitely not being used universally; ABC, WashPost, and USNews use the expression "derogatory". CNN calls "disparaging" and notes many people defending Jeong call them "satirical". Who knows where it will land when the dust settles--if anywhere worth noting. Beyond word choice, your note above saying I don't think any of that is disputed in any way at this point is just the issue: as WP:NOTNEWS, we're not aiming to post an update "at this point" (which would be appropriate, for a news site!), we're trying to decide if an event is rates a mention of an encyclopedic bio, which I don't think we can see on a subject like this after one day. I'm not saying this should definitely never be addressed; I'm only saying WP:CRYSTAL applies in understanding the significance of this, or not, in the bigger picture. Innisfree987 (talk) 02:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Innisfree987 argues that "Reiterating the BBC's version is what news aggregation sites do," as if the BBC were unique in reporting these facts, as if the Beeb were somehow fringe, when in fact, up until yesterday, the BBC was considered a gold standard among WP:RS around the Wikipedia. Innisfree987 also implies that the BBC is somehow unique, when there are other WP:RSs saying the exact same thing.

Infogalactic gives you the power to decide upon the relevant facts for yourself: Sarah Jeong. It would be nice if conservatives would simply use Infogalactic instead of constantly whining about Wikipedia doing what Wikipedia always does.

Speaking of stealth-editing, Christina Hoff Sommers notes that there’s “No mention of Sarah Jeong’s demented tweets on her Wikipedia page. Why? A little group of activist editors won’t allow it. Amazing. See them in action here.”

Why? Because the 500+ Wikipedia Admins are all SJWs and they have no intention of allowing any information on Wikipedia that will damage anyone on the Left if they can help it. Speaking of Infogalactic, we're making some changes to the server that should increase performance considerably on certain tasks. So, if it feels faster to you, you're not imagining it.

Infogalactic, AH forums down

Maintenance work on the servers. Shouldn't be down too long.

Digital Maoism

This is a really good interview with Jaron Lanier which hits on three important concepts:

This dovetails with something you’ve said in the past that’s with me, which is your phrase Digital Maoism. Do you think that the Digital Maoism that you described years ago — are those the people who run Silicon Valley today?

I was talking about a few different things at the time I wrote “Digital Maoism.” One of them was the way that we were centralizing culture, even though the rhetoric was that we were distributing it. Before Wikipedia, I think it would have been viewed as being this horrible thing to say that there could only be one encyclopedia, and that there would be one dominant entry for a given topic. Instead, there were different encyclopedias. There would be variations not so much in what facts were presented, but in the way they were presented. That voice was a real thing.

And then we moved to this idea that we have a single dominant encyclopedia that was supposed to be the truth for the global AI or something like that. But there’s something deeply pernicious about that. So we’re saying anybody can write for Wikipedia, so it’s, like, purely democratic and it’s this wonderful open thing, and yet the bizarreness is that that open democratic process is on the surface of something that struck me as being Maoist, which is that there’s this one point of view that’s then gonna be the official one.

And then I also noticed that that process of people being put into a global system in which they’re supposed to work together toward some sort of dominating megabrain that’s the one truth didn’t seem to bring out the best in people, that people turned aggressive and mean-spirited when they interacted in that context. I had worked on some content for Britannica years and years ago, and I never experienced the kind of just petty meanness that’s just commonplace in everything about the internet. Among many other places, on Wikipedia.

On the one hand, you have this very open collective process actually in the service of this very domineering global brain, destroyer of local interpretation, destroyer of individual voice process. And then you also have this thing that seems to bring out this meanness in people, where people get into this kind of mob mentality and they become unkind to each other. And those two things have happened all over the internet; they’re both very present in Facebook, everywhere. And it’s a bit of a subtle debate, and it takes a while to work through it with somebody who doesn’t see what I’m talking about. That was what I was talking about.

But then there’s this other thing about the centralization of economic power. What happened with Maoists and with communists in general, and neo-Marxists and all kinds of similar movements, is that on the surface, you say everybody shares, everybody’s equal, we’re not gonna have this capitalist concentration. But then there’s some other entity that might not look like traditional capitalism, but is effectively some kind of robber baron that actually owns everything, some kind of Communist Party actually controls everything, and you have just a very small number of individuals who become hyperempowered and everybody else loses power.

And exactly the same thing has happened with the supposed openness of the internet, where you say, “Isn’t it wonderful, with Facebook and Twitter anybody can express themselves. Everybody’s an equal, everybody’s empowered.” But in fact, we’re in a period of time of extreme concentration of wealth and power, and it’s precisely around those who run the biggest computers. So the truth and the effect is just the opposite of what the rhetoric is and the immediate experience.

A lot of people were furious with me over Digital Maoism and felt that I had betrayed our cause or something, and I lost some friends over it. And some of it was actually hard. But I fail to see how it was anything but accurate.

This guy is sharing some important insights into the intrinsic danger of centralization, even when it is unintentional and inadvertent. It also underlines the importance of the Infogalactic approach, which rejects the concept of the One True Page that defines objective reality for everyone on the basis of the opinions of the information gatekeepers.

Infogalactic Transporter

A new Chrome extension, courtesy of one of the Dread Ilk.

This extension allows the user to move between Wiki and IG. Auto-redirects from Wikipedia to Infogalactic's version of that page (whether entering via a link or the address bar).

Clicking the extension button shuttles you back to the Wiki version (and disables auto-redirect for that tab), and clicking again takes you back to Infogalactic. If you navigate away, on that tab, to some website outside either Wiki or IG, it'll reset the behaviour back to auto-redirecting.

Behaviour is also bound to the tab in which the clicking took place - that is to say, if you click the button (thus disabling auto-redirect), and open a new tab, that new tab will obey the default redirect behaviour (taking you to Infogalactic if you visit Wikipeida).

Future goals:
- Easy copy/paste of wikipedia text of current page (for transporting missing content)

Wikipedia: the information manager

This little exchange on a Wikipedia Talk page demonstrates the vital importance of Infogalactic as well as the fact that even the highest-ranking Wikipedians are well aware of the Planetary Knowledge Core and its potential significance. You will note that Wikipedia admins are primarily concerned with managing "publicity" and concealing relevant information from the public instead of making it available to them.

Pictures of murderers?
Is there a reason why they are not shown in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.184.18 (talk) 19:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Why do you want to give them publicity? Doug Weller talk 19:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

They're available on Infogalactic here: https://infogalactic.com/info/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.228.112.21 (talk) 22:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

The pictures of those disgusting criminals are shown in nearly all news articles covering the event. I think we should show the pictures so their faces are forever associated with that act of evil they committed. Mr Ernie (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, that's not a good reason. As for the IP's comment, Infogalactic is an alt-right website created by Vox Day and a bad example. Doug Weller talk 06:31, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Doug Weller their photographs were routinely shown by the local newspaper (The Knoxville News Sentinel). There were constant updates about the trial by reporter Jamie Satterfield, whose reporting probably constitutes the bulk of all reporting about this saga. I don't understand your argument that showing their photos gives them "publicity." It's also a bit odd for you to ascribe RIGHTGREATWRONGS to my comment. There is nothing to RIGHT as they were convicted of their crimes. Mr Ernie (talk) 14:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

IIn any case, "so their faces are forever associated with that act of evil they committed." means to me that your reason is not that it would be encyclopedic but you want to use the article to as you say associate their faces etc. But no one or at least no one who wasn't closely involved is ever going to remember their faces. Although I guess they might remember they were black. Which would be a terrible reason to include their faces of course. It would certainly publicise that fact. Doug Weller talk 14:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

The Wikipedia editor attempting to bury the fact that the murderers of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom were black is an administrator on the English Wikipedia for 9 years, 6 months and 23 days, who is on the Arbitration Committee, has checkuser rights, and is an oversighter on the English Wikipedia. He is also is identified to the Wikimedia Foundation as one with access to nonpublic data.

And the fact that the 536 active administrators are almost uniformly SJWs intent on utilizing Wikipedia for social justice is why Infogalactic will be an increasingly vital resource in years to come. Infogalactic is not "an alt-right website", and this will become increasingly clear to even the most inveterate SJWs over time.

Infogalactic update

We made some major changes to the Infogalactic structure yesterday. While most of the work is interior stuff that will not be readily apparent to the user, we have significantly expanded our storage and processing capabilities while reducing our monthly burn rate by about one-third. This means that we are running about twice as fast and about 2.7 times more efficiently than before, while giving us considerably more control over our backend.

What this means, as you will see, is that our search time has been cut in half again. Just copy and paste :i vox day into the search bar of Brave and you will see what I mean.

Thanks very much to the Burn Unit, who continue to keep Infogalactic moving forward. And you should not fail to note that the Planetary Knowledge Core is actively updating itself, as even recent events such as March Madness 2018 are already documented online.

We're #2

Things have been quiet at Infogalactic lately, and they will continue to be quiet even as we continue to improve performance, until DONTPANIC is ready to bring the noise, but you can bet that Wikipedia is aware that it exists now. This is #2 on Breitbart's list of the Best Examples of Left-wing Bias on Wikipedia in 2017:

2. Burying CNN’s Blackmail controversy and other scandals at the network

Shortly after CNN’s blackmail controversy, an editor created a page on the topic. Other editors promptly had the story buried by moving the content  into the bottom section of an article about CNN controversies. Roughly two dozen editors, mostly left-wing, supported this move citing a policy that says Wikipedia is not for news. Five of these editors showed a double standard, having previously voted to keep an article on Trump’s disclosure of intelligence about ISIS threats in a meeting with Russia where the same policy would apply.

A few editors went even further by cutting out critical information on the blackmail controversy from even the general CNN controversies article, as well as gutting nearly a third of the article’s content covering a variety of scandals that gripped the network, despite much of it being backed by sources considered reliable by Wikipedia standards. These removals included a section on CNN New Year’s Eve host Kathy Griffin’s firing from the network, which was justified by claiming it wasn’t a CNN controversy. The same argument was used to keep out mention of undercover journalist James O’Keefe’s video series on CNN, itself denied its own article by many of the same editors.

Only a small amount of the removed content had been restored after the flurry of deletions. When the situation was mentioned on the Vox Popoli blog of science fiction author Vox Day, the founder of Wikipedia alternative Infogalactic, an editor sought to restore noteworthy content about the blackmail controversy and was immediately reverted.

Scandalous! The mainstream media won't cover this, of course, but that's fine. More and more people are routing around them every day.

But this underlines the importance of Infogalactic. Do take the trouble to thank the Burn Unit, which make it run. And if you're using Infogalactic, consider joining it. The thing about foundational structures like Infogalactic is that they're neither sexy nor exciting. That's why people pay so little attention to them even when they rely upon them heavily. The thing is, they are absolutely vital. Which, of course, is why I prioritized it in the first place.

Note that only 561 of Wikipedia's 1,237 administrators are active now. We have a LONG way to go, but it is doable. And the more that Wikipedia is converged by its admins, the easier our long march becomes.

Wikipedia buries CNN scandal

This sort of thing is exactly why I put Infogalactic at the top of the priority list. Because we need a way of accurately preserving the history that SJWs are always trying to revise and rewrite:

CNN Blackmail Controversy Buried on Wikipedia with Help of Partisan Editors

Following CNN’s blackmail controversy, left-wing Wikipedia editors had the Wikipedia article on the incident removed and its contents buried at the bottom of a page on CNN controversies. Editors then proceeded to gut this article of roughly a third of its content about controversies at the network in the latest example of liberal bias at the online encyclopedia.

Roughly an hour after the article on CNN’s recent blackmail scandal was originally created, editor NorthBySouthBaranof started a discussion on having the article made into a redirect to a CNN controversies article with a small section about the incident. Baranof was previously one of the anti-GamerGate editors banned from edits about the ethics in games journalism controversy due to his aggressive agenda-driven editing.

Over the course of the discussion, 23 regular editors on the site expressed support for the move. Although a majority of editors supporting the move in the discussion have some history of editing in favor of progressive positions, most notable are a group of five (MrX, Volunteer Marek, Objective3000, Sagecandor, and ValarianB) who also participated in a discussion on deleting the article about President Trump sharing classified information on ISIS terrorist activities with Russia.

Standard operating procedure at the SJW-converged site. Rather like the BEA, which has retroactively eliminated the 2001 recession from the official GDP figures, SJW history reflects nothing more than their version of what it suits them now to claim happened then.

Classic headlines

This was simply too good not to mention.

Transgender Woman Danica Roem Elected To Virginia HouseLeft Celebrates Another White Man In Office

If you're not relying upon Infogalactic News for your daily headlines, you are missing out in more ways than one.

I haven't spoken about Infogalactic much because we are in pure heads-down development mode. But rest assured, progress continues and the Burn Unit resources are not only not being wasted, we are using them more economically and efficiently than ever. This is a long game, more akin to an ultra-marathon than the proverbial sprint, and we are actively working on adding features that no one presently even imagines.

Just create. Just do it.

Davis Aurini commends those who go out and create rather than sit around and complain:

Rather than trying to distribute the ideas – and handing them over to the Obsessives and Extremists who turn them into a farce – we need to own them.  We need to implement them.

We must go out there and create.

Roosh V took this theory, and put together a series of books which explained it’s application to his audience.  He wasn’t lecturing about theory – he was writing about practice.  He created something useful and marketable, a solid base which he owned.  This expanded into his forum, a community which has taken on a life of its own.  It is worth noting that the RVF exists for its own sake, not as a counter-reaction against an ideological opponent.  While feminists are frequently ridiculed on its pages, those who comprise the membership would be just as happy if there were no feminists to oppose.  RVF members don’t derive their identity from being anti-X – their identity comes from their individual accomplishments, and they frequent the forum for the sake of intellectual debate, entertainment, and networking.  Any political actions which derive from this shared identity will be as organic as the community-group that participates in local politics.

Another prominent example of the Red Pill in application is Vox Day’s various endeavours.  Of note are Castalia House and InfoGalactic.  Upon realizing that the publishing industry and Wikipedia had been taken over by far-left interest groups who eschewed objective truth and good fiction in favour of ideological nepotism, he didn’t go on a quest to ‘raise awareness’ of the problem; instead, he saw an opportunity for action.  While both of these projects are still finding their footing, by all accounts InfoGalactic is not only providing unbiased information, it’s providing it at a superior level to the equivalent articles on Wikipedia.   Castalia House, meanwhile, is free to pick up the talented authors who are being ignored by the mainstream publishers due to their race or sex.

The truth is that the SJWs are creating more opportunities for us than we can reasonably pursue. The trick is to identify the institutional weakness and hit it hard. For example, one thing I've learned about the comic industry is that the artists are often not paid royalties, just a flat per-page rate. So, one thing we are going to do to ensure that we eventually secure the best talent over time is, in addition to the flat fee, pay royalties for an extended period of time on our comic book sales, just as we do on our regular book sales.

You can't start at the top, but you can come up with a plan to get there eventually. The Castalia House team goes over every print book carefully; if you compare our earliest print editions to the latest ones, you can see that we're continually trying to improve the product. Creation is a dynamic process, and so the more you focus on improvement, the more you will gradually improve, until one day people suddenly blink and say, "Hey, you know, that's actually rather good."

Ever notice that no one calls Castalia House my vanity publishing house any more? I never had to say one single word to convince people otherwise. We just keep working on improving our offerings, one ebook or print edition or audiobook at a time. (I've always said that we'll know that Castalia, or Infogalactic, is truly successful when the SJWs start denying that I had anything to do with it.) There is no magic plan for success and no easy path. You simply have to choose your path and walk it as tirelessly as you can.

Speaking of Castalia House, it turns out that today is a dual-release day. THE LAST WITCHKING & OTHER STORIES is now available on Amazon and Audible. Narrated by Jeremy Daw, our wonderful new narrator, it is 9 hours and 13 minutes of epic fantasy set in Selenoth. It includes "The Wardog's Coin", "Qalabi Dawn", and "A Magic Broken" as well as the three stories from the ebook edition, "The Last Witchking", "The Hoblets of Wiccam Fensboro", and "Opera Vita Aeterna".

The next Selenoth audiobook will be Summa Elvetica & Other Stories, which will also be narrated by Jeremy Daw.

Alt-Tech overview

One year on, Cheah Kai Wai reviews the current state of Alt-Tech:

Last year, the Alt-Tech promised a revolution. These platforms aimed to disrupt and replace the legacy platforms, placing the rights and freedoms of users first. One year on, how well did they fare?

Infogalactic

Infogalactic is an unqualified success story. Beginning as a dynamic hard fork of Wikipedia, it strives to be more objective and informative than its predecessor. In line with its Seven Canons, Infogalactic maintains a strict non-ideological position for all facts -- but in the future, it will introduce Context and Opinion levels to its pages, allowing greater depth of content.

Every time I compared an Infogalactic page to Wikipedia, I found the former to be more informative and accurate. The only major knock against Infogalactic is its load time, and even that is improving by the day. In the beginning, it took long minutes to load a single page. Today, it is only slightly slower than Wikipedia.

I use Infogalactic exclusively these days. Wikipedia's explicit left-wing bias means it is no longer a neutral source of information. Infogalactic has demonstrated itself to be a viable and sustainable alternative to Wikipedia, and in the long term I suspect the disruption and replacement of Wikipedia is inevitable.

Gab

Gab was supposed to be the Twitter killer. A platform dedicated to free speech, it has survived allegations and lies about it being the haven of the Alt-Right and Neo-Nazis. Apple and Google have repeatedly prevented Gab from publishing its app on the iTunes Store and Google Play Store respectively for spurious reasons. Gab brands itself as a proponent of free speech -- but that is also its undoing.

Gab's key weakness is its inability or unwillingness to moderate posts. While it is unwaveringly committed to free speech, freedom is not and cannot be unlimited. As the old adage goes, your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. Harmful speech -- speech that incites violence or compromises the privacy and safety of individuals -- is not protected speech. Gab must be able to moderate harmful content to preserve the continued health and safety of its users, and it has failed the test....

These controversies expose Gab's core weakness. As Gab refused to moderate harmful speech, Gab users have no choice but to lodge complaints with the domain registrar, who will inevitably respond by ordering Gab off its platform. Like the Daily Stormer, I foresee Gab migrating from registrar to registrar, virtually guaranteeing disruption of services. Alternatively, these users may turn to the police and the courts instead, which will invite another round of troubles.

Free speech ends where harm begins. Incitement to violence, exposure of confidential information, and lying about someone to smear his reputation counts as harm. If Gab will not handle harmful speech in-house, other parties will. To Gab's detriment. I, for one, cannot in good conscience continue to recommend anyone to use Gab until they fix this oversight, if ever.

Ironically, the fevered assaults by the Daily Stormpoopers and other Gab enthusiasts on me appear to have borne some unexpected fruit. After I reported about 20 or 30 attack tweets to Twitter, in addition to banning and suspending a few of the responsible accounts, Twitter has restored full link access to Vox Popoli using the .com extension after more than 18 months of blocking it.

Enemy of my enemy and all that, I suppose. Go figure.

I will also say that my experience of Brave has been considerably more positive than Cheah's. But regardless, I am very pleased to know that Infogalactic is working so well for its users, even in Phase One.

Fake Ads

As Facebook has already been caught multiple times, Google has been caught faking ad traffic:

The WSJ is reporting that Google is issuing refunds to advertisers over "fake traffic," and are now working on new safeguards against the issue.

Google’s refunds amount to only a fraction of the total ad spending served to invalid traffic, which has left some advertising executives unsatisfied, the people familiar with the situation said. Google has offered to repay its “platform fee,” which ad buyers said typically ranges from about 7% to 10% of the total ad buy.

The company says this is appropriate, because it doesn’t control the rest of the money. Typically, advertisers use DoubleClick Bid Manager to target audiences across vast numbers of websites in seconds by connecting to dozens of online ad exchanges, marketplaces that connect buyers and publishers through real-time auctions.

As we at Adland have argued for years now, digital paid media is a fraud due to the many incidents of fake traffic, bots, and the smoke and mirrors that blind the less tech savvy clients. Last year, Russian bots earned 180 million by fake-watching ads all over the Google empire.

Google has participated in efforts to clean up the digital market, joining the industry initiative Ads.txt project launched back in May by the Interactive Advertising Bureau. They're hoping to bring trust back into the digital ecosystem. But in the arms race between consumers who use ad blockers and ad networks making ads unblockable, unskippable and even more intrusive, the consumers are staying one step ahead. More importantly with each new fraud brought to light and the hundreds of millions wasted, it's hard to believe clients take Google at face value much longer. Advertisers are finally figuring out that this is a house of cards, built by pretty graphs in slick interfaces that look great on paper but in reality does very little to drive sales.

Google's latest crisis comes at the same time that it is removing content creators from the ability to monetize their content, policing Youtube like never before. Google's policing doesn't end there, however. In Professor Jordan Peterson's case, they banned him from his entire account, including mail and calendar.

Bloomberg reports that Google has just begun their biggest crackdown on "extremist content"

The new restrictions, which target what Walker called "inflammatory religious or supremacist content," are expected to hit a small fraction of videos, according to person familiar with the company. YouTube says it uploads over 400 hours of video a minute. Videos tagged by its new policy won’t be able to run ads or have comments posted, and won’t appear in any recommended lists on the video site. A warning screen will also appear before the videos, which will not be able to play when embedded on external websites. YouTube will let video creators contest the restrictions through an appeals process, a spokeswoman said.

If the appeals process is anything like what Adland encountered, then it will be labyrinthian, time-consuming and arbitrary. The only reason we were un-banned from Adsense the first time around, was because we knew someone who knew someone that worked at Google in Ireland. These days, the only replies we get are automatic. Adland.tv the domain has even been delisted from Google search completely, which we managed to fix, and we're currently being heavily deranked for no apparent reason. Or perhaps these articles are the reason.

In dealing with international brand boycott of Google advertising, and cleaning house so that they no longer fund terrorism by running pre-roll Super Bowl ads on ISIS videos, Google is now again apologising and "tweaking" their system.

The ad economy is increasingly a) monopolistic and b) fraudulent. I have never used AdSense or Facebook ads because I have never seen any indication whatsoever that they are effective or reliable. I did try using BookBub four times, but after they rejected both A THRONE OF BONES as well as Jerry Pournelle's THERE WILL BE WAR for ad campaigns, I stopped using them.

What I have found to be effective is a) this blog, b) Larry Correia's book bombs, c) the Amazon giveaways, and d) the two mailing lists. In other words, direct marketing. Indirect marketing, be it advertising in magazines or the various social media ad schemes, only appear to benefit the owner of the advertising vehicle rather than the advertiser.

Notice that YouTube still puts ads on videos it has demonetized. Such as those produced by Ron Paul.

Former US Congressman Ron Paul has joined a growing list of independent political journalists and commentators who’re being economically punished by YouTube despite producing videos that routinely receive hundreds of thousands of views. In a tweet published Saturday, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange tweeted a screenshot of Paul’s “Liberty Report” page showing that his videos had been labeled “not suitable” for all advertisers by YouTube's content arbiters.

Infogalactic is up again

Just FYI. Nothing serious, just a technical problem. It should be back up before 9 AM this morning. It's neither an attack nor a billing issue.

UPDATE: 9:20 AM Eastern. We're back up.