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.
You should be very proud of this project!! Thank you for sharing.
In the US cops have been known to deploy ‘Stingray’ devices that spoof a cell tower and create a record of every phone in the area. In the context of a protests, these records could be used to determine who attend multiple events, who the likely organizers are, etc to create lists of undesirable people who may receive special attention from law enforcement.
More specifically, if shit goes down at a protest there is digital record of your attendance. It’s very easy to go from a peaceful protester to a criminal in the eyes of the government.
Well at least Nicole from Toronto in their inbox.
Awww skeet skeet mutha fuckaaaa
As a presenter would be mortified.
As an attendee, hilarious.
That’s not really Forbes serving the malvertising intentionally. If your site hooks into a programmatic advertising stack, the risk of malware exists. This is from 2016, but it’s mostly true today. If a user is blocking ads and cookies and they disable their ad blocker on a specific site only, there’s little data to know about that user. So you get low $CPM on the bid which is mainly where the malicious ads win bids on actual quality sites. That’s why most top sites are very strict on who can bid nowadays.
If true, I’d expect Furkan to be upset, but I suppose he just respects the technology behind the algo 🤷