About the only time I find myself using regular Wikipedia these days is if I need to know if someone died since August 2025 when this ZIM dump was created.
About the only time I find myself using regular Wikipedia these days is if I need to know if someone died since August 2025 when this ZIM dump was created.
45 Comments
kali_fornication@lemmy.world · 51 pts · 215d
I have all of wikipedia in a single 156 GB text file. in my
.zshrci havefastWikiLookup() { cat ~/wikipedia.txt | grep "$@" }Badabinski@kbin.earth · 59 pts · 215d
If you want a free and massive performance optimization, remove the
cat:Reading and piping 156 GB of data to another process every time you want to look something up is a somewhat nontrivial action. Grep can directly read the file, which should result in a pretty damn good speed up.
kali_fornication@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 215d
i thought it was obvious i was joking but yeah, that would be faster
Badabinski@kbin.earth · 13 pts · 215d
It was obvious and I was being a bit of a dummy this morning. Mea culpa.
bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 17 pts · 215d
Considering the community, I think catting 156 GB to grep and calling it
fastWikiLookupis a subtle joke about how absurd this is.Badabinski@kbin.earth · 7 pts · 215d
Yeah, I was being pretty thick earlier today. Oopsie!
Jimbabwe@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 215d
rip Greg would shine here
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de · 10 pts · 215d
Poor Greg. 😔🪦
Jimbabwe@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 215d
You know what? I’m leaving it.
RIP ripgrep
Long live rip Greg
nesc@lemmy.cafe · 9 pts · 215d
How fast is it, really? How do you differentiate between topics?
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 215d
That's the neat part ...
kali_fornication@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 215d
the topic differentiation technology doesn't exist yet, so i just hit ctrl+c about a second after i hit enter
kautau@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 215d
lol database engineers who’ve built very complex systems and ingest and query mechanisms across the world all the sudden got very mad at your comment and they’re not sure why
Maxxie@piefed.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 215d
what the hell I want that
gon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 215d
Holy...
kali_fornication@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 215d
my shit is optimized AF
malean@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 215d
When I have to poop, I scroll through the Wikipedia app, I'm done scrolling reels/short. The front page is well curated and entertaing and at least I don't have to deal with sloppy and fake content.
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works · 25 pts · 215d
WikiTok Swipe through random articles.
bobo1900@startrek.website · 4 pts · 214d
First article it gave me was for "Human extinction" lol
notthebees@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 205d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warning_messages
This was my favorite random pull
SendMePhotos@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 215d
There's a wiki app?!
Fun fact, if you search for a term but start with !w you will get the wiki page.
Cheems@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 215d
I'm about to go find that as well
Bz1sen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 215d
How did I not know this 😅
SendMePhotos@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 215d
Idk I just learned about it like a week ago and I am from pre internet
kingofthezyx@lemmy.zip · 29 pts · 215d
Seeious question - since Wikipedia doesn't serve ads, wouldn't a drop in direct traffic be a good thing for them? It would reduce their server costs and presumably the people who truly value Wikipedia (contributors and donors) would still use it for its intended purpose.
Ignoring the population as a whole getting dumber, which seems to be a side effect of everything these days.
BigDiction@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 215d
My concern would be losing market share to other sources resulting in Wikipedia slowly being forgotten by future generations. Then the downstream of effects of fewer new contributions, and increasingly consolidated moderators.
Then not being at the forefront of the Internet hurts prestige that reduces donations. I agree with your point on ad revenue vs server costs, but I imagine a 20% reduction in traffic hurts their long strategy more than a 20% reduction on hosting costs.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 18 pts · 215d
People are doing less reading
I don't think that is a net positive
ptz@dubvee.org · 10 pts · 215d
Technically, yeah. But with less people going to Wikipedia directly there would probably stand to be less chance of getting any new contributors. I'm not sure how the foundation gets all its money, but the more traffic they serve the more they can prove their relevance which might matter for funding
arrow74@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 215d
Maybe I'm cynical but the type to use just the AI overview and the type donating to Wikipedia probably doesn't have that much overlap
NateNate60@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 214d
Wikipedia relies on people reading it and realising "Wait, that's wrong..." to fix inaccuracies.
Recently some PR company was caught taking money to whitewash the Wikipedia pages of their clients. The more people that are looking at the pages, the more likely it is that someone will realise they are being manipulated maliciously.
negativenull@piefed.world · 18 pts · 215d
ptz@dubvee.org · 22 pts · 215d
Lol, "PatrickGPT" would be the easiest novelty chatbot to write, too.
negativenull@piefed.world · 16 pts · 215d
quick and dirty:
https://patrickgpt.negativenull.net/
ptz@dubvee.org · 4 pts · 215d
Fantastic! 😆
ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 215d
Patrick, can you stop that?
puppycat@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 15 pts · 215d
friendly reminder to seed wikipedia :)
Sequence5666@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 215d
how to seed wiki? Like on a torrent?
Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 12 pts · 215d
Well I edit Wikipedia so if anything I am making its traffic increase.
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca · 10 pts · 215d
How large is the dump and does it have images in it?
cmac@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 215d
47 GB for text only, 111 GB with images (both only English articles)
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 215d
Hm. I could self-host that.
REDACTED@infosec.pub · 8 pts · 214d
So, outdated Wikipedia?
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 215d
I'm on Linux because I hate Windows and Microslop, not because I love Linux.
While I'm guilty of sometimes stopping at the Google summary, which I see in Startpage searches, I usually do click through because the summary often doesn't show what I want to know. Usually what I want to know isn't the primary information, but something more obscure, or some possible connection.
titanicx@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 215d
Your comment answered my question. Which was how often hasn't been updated. August 2025 was fairly recent but I'm betting a number of articles are out of date at this point in time. For general reference an offline copy is good and it helps to keep an archive. But I wouldn't use it on the regular for standard references.
kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 215d
A man of good taste, i see