This girl acts like Wikipedia owners don’t realize this shit. It’s about principles. Modern web is simply cancer that is eating out the planet from the inside, one TCP segment at a time (although with HTTP3 and QUIC we gotta call it a datagram!).
I realize this is just a fun video, but I got super triggered because I am dead tired of ‘Silicon Valley Mindset’ and this girl embodies it to the extreme.
She also claims that the app has a better design than the desktop website so I’m not really convinced they’re even a good designer if this isn’t just tongue in cheek. It’s too crazy not to be satire.
Speaking as someone who has some experience with graphic design, I agree. She doesn’t seem to have any knowledge of accessibility features and her criticisms are mostly unrelated to how the eye follows information or how attention is drawn. They seem to be following a naive aesthetic doctrine instead of design principles.
The app does look better.
This seems to be posted on this forum with that title solely for rage-bait.
She clearly just-for-fun redesigned Wikipedia as if a modern company got a hold of it. Yes of course this would drive people in this forum up a wall, but that’s just not the point. This is also not about programming at all?
Don’t go around looking for content of other creators just to take it out of context and then bash it.
This is like you watched “we made marvel r-rated” from corridor digital (https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=k5-3eujJyZE) and then post about it, being pissed how they destroyed a superhero fantasy aimed at a wide audience and children and how noone would ever want something like that.
Calling her a bad designer just because you disagree with her design decisions is just mean. This entire post just makes it seem like you are specifically looking for things to hate…
The design and semantic search are great. The rest is eww.
I don’t know what “Figma” is but it sounds stupid.
Figma balls
It’s like Ligma but different
That’s what’s called a fig newton.
It’s currently the best tool for doing UX/design work.
Programming?
But regardless, IMO, I’d rather have useful “pro” features than get that nagging banner up there. However, this does open a certain door I’m uncomfortable opening. If the owners of wikipedia suddenly wanted to cash in on the popularity of the site and act like a mega corps, they obviously could. But it is true that wikipedia’s services aren’t free, so complaining about them trying to keep it alive is entitled.
Maybe the middle ground is to take all that this person did, create another website, and donate proceedings from “pro” users to wikipedia. For every subscriber, donate at least 2€ or a user-defined amount to wikipedia. That way wikipedia stays the way it is and another website tries out this monetisation idea.
Great take as always. May I suggest we be the change we want to see and host our own federated wiki? One of the great dev of lemmy has recently made one and a short search shows there are a lot of possibilites. At least thats my opinion atm. I think wiki.js is also working on federation iirc.
Thanks 🙏 People who do have the time, will and skill, could (should?) be the change they want to see.
The idea of a federated wiki does sound exciting and indeed could allow for a “pro wiki” instance. Hopefully somebody with the aforementioned qualities finds an interest in federated wikis. On my end only time is lacking. For now, it’ll end up on my (huge) list of ideas that I’m trying to work off.
Have a good one
That’s what they are doing with Fandom (formerly Wikia). Right?
That’s just a wiki on a specific topic. IINM that doesn’t contribute to wikipedia, nor to proceeds (nor in part or in full) go to wikipedia.
Not sure how they actually make money since I can’t find “pro” options.
Damn I hated watching that, fuck pro and all this other monetization shit my god
