TIL That the entirety of Wikipedia is only ~100Gb and you can download it for offline use

I presume this is images directly hosted on English Wikipedia and not the entirety of Commons where the vast majority of images are kept, right?

Some of the high res photos are ridiculous.

Like a 8000x9000 uncompressed image of someone's hand and weighs about 22mb.

I know that because I use a lot of royalty free images.

I've installed game patches that were larger than this.

Probably a lot less, keep in mind that whenever it answers a question the whole model is traversed multiple times, going through multiple GBs is not possible in the matter of seconds the model answers.

Plus input data?

So it would fit on a Bluray disc

We do this at work (lots of sensitive data that we don't want Openai to capitalize on) and it works pretty well. Hosted locally, setup by a data security and privacy sensitive admin, who specifically runs the settings to not save any queries even on the server. Bit slower than chatgpt but not by much

https://simple.wikipedia.org/ *ducks*

Ten year old me would beg to differ.

Videos turned Encarta 95 from being an encyclopedia to the encyclopedia!

I jest - a multimedia experience helps but I agree that the text knowledge is the big draw.

I tried searching but found nothing. What incident?

1. There is a set of criteria to rate an article B, C, Start or Stub. These are called classes. Similarly, articles can be rated to be of 1 of 4 importance values to a particular WikiProject.
2. There’s a banner on every article’s talk page. Any editor can change an article’s rating between one of the above classes boldly; if a revert happens, they discuss it according to the criteria.
3. Some WikiProjects have their own criteria for rating articles. Some of them even have process to make an article A-class.
4. Before this system, Wikipedia already had processes to make an article a Good Article or Featured article.

• With GAs, a nominator should put a candidate onto backlog. Later, a reviewer will scrutinize the article according to criteria. Often, the reviewer asks the nominator to fix quite a bit of issues. If these issues are fixed promptly, or the reviewer thinks that there are only nitpicks, the article passes. If they aren’t fixed in a week or the reviewer thinks that there are major problems, the article fails.
• • As with other processes, the nominator and reviewer can be anyone, though reviewers are usually experienced.
• With FAs, a nominator brings the candidate to a noticeaboard. Editors there then come to a consensus about whether the article should pass.
• Both processes display a badge directly on passed articles.
• Both processes have an associated re-review process where editors come to a consensus whether the article should fail if it were nominated today
• There’s also an informal process called “peer review”, where someone just puts an article at a noticeable and anyone can comment about its quality.

5. Articles are automatically sorted into categories by their rating and importance. Editors usually look at these to decide which articles to focus on nowadays.

Do you wear a cape? Or are you one of those who doesn't wear one?

Sorry, I meant to reply to the commenter with the chatgpt on a dvd pic saying that it's actually feasible for Wikipedia.

China is making a copy. For... reasons.

Currently where I am working can't get high. But can get drunk. But was neither when I wrote that. My ISP is very brutal on looking up stuff or downloading shit.