Recently I was wandering if there is someone or some group preserving , collecting , organizing and publishing all the knowledge of mankind ever created throughout its existence so that if ever mankind faces the 6th mass extinction we don’t have to reinvent the wheel and can have a kick start to our new post apocalyptic civilization .

  • jeff
    link
    fedilink
    1061 year ago

    Wikipedia is a great start. You can download its entirety, roughly 100gb. Most of the basic and advanced human knowledge.

    Check out kiwix to get it offline

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      301 year ago

      Seconded Wikipedia. The amount of knowledge that can be gleaned in mere minutes from Wikipedia is insane. It contains enough information to do most stuff, aside from blatantly illegal things.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        Luckily it isnt that easy to burn down every server as burning carpets in south america or books in other places

    • Random Dent
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      You can do all of Project Gutenberg too. It’s only about 75gb, surprisingly.

      • ddh
        link
        fedilink
        English
        331 year ago

        Wikipedia is absolutely not useless without the sources. I don’t even know what to say, that statement is so deranged.

        • WP as it is is of course not useless. But don’t confuse it with a real library. Then, imagine in the apocalyptical worst case, having archived only that summary of humankind’s knowledge. There’s a vast amount of detail that WP is just not the right place for.

          • ddh
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            Well, sure, of course it leaves a lot of material out. But you’d start with Wikipedia surely, then move onto the source material. If Wikipedia leaves out a lot of material, any one of its sources leaves out a lot more.

      • @Viking_Hippie
        link
        101 year ago

        Then you download the source material too, shouldn’t be more than a few Yottabytes 🤷

      • @GrabtharsHammer
        link
        121 year ago

        Such an insightful commentary on the importance of the social contract and the irreplacibility of the individual. The only way forward is to share our personal experiences and strive for understanding. Once we know each other’s value, we will never surrender our common bonds, disappoint one another, go behind each other’s backs, nor do each other harm.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I feel like you’re stretching the definition of “knowledge” and definitely “human knowledge” a bit there.

      • ozebb
        link
        English
        11 year ago

        Maybe so — I think that’s kind of the fun of it though 🙂

  • IWantToFuckSpez
    link
    fedilink
    33
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There isn’t. Yes Wikipedia has a lot of info but think of all the information that is in the hands of governments and corporations that are closely held secrets. Or that’s only in the minds of a few experts on the planet.

    Like sure Wikipedia can tell you what a CPU is. But to build one from scratch, from the silica to building the machines and factories, that information is spread across multiple companies and never shared with the public. And only a few experts truly know how to do every step in the process, they have vital knowledge of that process that they feel is common sense and is not written down, which they pass on to the people they mentor. If those few people die at the same time in a catastrophe the knowledge that isn’t written down dies with them.

    We already lost a lot of information of old tech from not that long ago because the companies went bankrupt or the people involved all died. Like we don’t even have all the knowledge to rebuild the Saturn V rockets, because the people involved, who hold vital knowledge, are dead and the supporting infrastructure, like the sub contractors (who also had vital knowledge), is gone as well.

  • @the_q
    link
    28
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    deleted by creator

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    26
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Perhaps https://archive.org/ is the closest you could get? With nearly a trillion web pages in its archive, I don’t think I’ve ever come across a database of knowledge that comes close to it’s collection. What’s interesting is that archive.org preserves not only web pages, but several pieces of binary content such as music, movies, art and even software applications and entire operating systems. Not sure if it would be enough to rebuild our society, but it would be a great starting point for most of our essentials.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      Specifically their OpenLibrary division. They had a mission to make as many books as possible digitally available and free for everyone to borrow but unfortunately they keep getting hit with lawsuits and slowly take down more and more of their collection.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      It’s “its”, not “it’s”, unless you mean “it is”, in which case it is “it’s “.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      yes archive.org is pretty good in finding some very obscure and rare movie from 30s or 40s or some old books or niche software or music but most of the things on it are webpages and 100s of copies of the same webpage in different times (not very useful in a post apocalyptic world tho as most of the things on the archived websites you can’t even click because its only a snapshot )

  • @foggy
    link
    241 year ago

    All of Wikipedia is <256 gb.

    All of Wikipedia in English <64 gb.

    Then archive.org for multimedia, ~10 peta bytes. Yipes.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    211 year ago

    That is pretty much exactly the goal of the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia and its sister projects.

    But by now we figured out what wikis can do well and what not. Wikis are suitable for crowdsourcing objective facts about the world (all it takes is one person to add any given fact), they are not a universal remedy for everything, especially not contentious issues or useful instructional materials.

    I have made more than 100000 edits to their projects. I don’t participate there anymore. The time when they were a force for good in the world is long past.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        Many reasons most of which you’ll only understand if you pay some attention to what’s going on behind their scenes.

        There are reasons why nowadays pretty much everywhere else on the Internet more content is created all the time than on the Wikimedia projects.

        The Wikipedias’ “neutral point of view” policy used to mean “we try to treat all sides fairly”, now it means “we are writing an unconditional propaganda organ for the status quo”. The mainstream media that is accepted as “reliable” as Wikipedia sources just isn’t that credible anymore.

        Also, when I started editing there, the individual projects were mostly left alone by the WMF. Nowadays the WMF issues intransparent sanctions, up to lifetime bans from all projects, left and right.

        I wish someone started an organization with the same goals as the WMF with an actually working system where people could actually enjoy participating.

        • Doubletwist
          link
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Be the change you want to see in the world…

          Heck most of the hard work is already done for you, since the software that runs Wikipedia is open source.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            Many people have tried that before. Wikis just aren’t that appealing anymore. Today’s internet is all about social media.

            • Doubletwist
              link
              11 year ago

              If there’s anything that is absolutely atrocious as a searchable repository of knowledge, it’s social media.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      most libraries lack 90% of collective human knowledge and most libraries today (in asia particularly) are pretty shit in number and quality of books … Wikipedia yes but still it can be manipulated by rich people or government for their own interests

      • Cyclohexane
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Not just can be. Wikipedia has been proven to be manipulated by political interests.

        • The problem with such approaches will be human curiosity. Imagine today’s scientists find such a site from the late paleolithic which has messages like “This site is cursed; we buried here what causes death and pestilence to us; go no further or it will do the same to you!” – You bet they will want to see what is inside the “buried temple of death”.

          • @antim0ny
            link
            21 year ago

            Yes but they would only send one person or a small group, carefully and with protection. Without any sign people would just walk in and slowly suffer the consequences.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      “On July 6, 2022, an explosive device was detonated at the site, destroying the Swahili/Hindi language slab and causing significant damage to the capstone. Nearby residents reportedly heard and felt explosions at around 4:00 a.m” the rocks got destroyed by a mere explosive and they thought it could survive a nuclear war lol

      • lol3droflxp
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        Well, if a nuke actually hits anything built to withstand nuclear war, it will break. There is nothing really that can withstand direct exposure to powerful explosives.

      • Sabata11792
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        I assume the plan was Georgia since there’s nothing worth nukeing there.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    Check out this book: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Knowledge:_How_to_Rebuild_Our_World_from_Scratch. It analyses that precise question in the first chapter. The author argues that even though Wikipedia is probably the closest thing there is, there is a clear lack of practical knowledge that will be essential in the situation that you are describing. Science progress heavily relies on industrial progress, and even if you know how to build something that doesn’t mean that you can do it, as there are other things that are required first.

  • DarkMatterStyx
    link
    121 year ago

    I think the internet as a whole is going to be the closest we’ll ever come. Capitalism will make sure it’s never even close to complete so it always has something to monetize.

    • Decoy321
      link
      41 year ago

      I wouldn’t say “complete” can even be sufficiently defined in this case. Every functional definition I can think of has a limiting factor.

      Let’s try to define knowledge. What kind of information qualifies? We can usually think of important, useful info like physics and medicine. But what about other data, like sports game stats, atmospheric sensor readings, or even something more esoteric, like the location data of every object on earth.

      And even if we could have the information of every single thing at any particular time, what about when things change in the next second? And the one afterwards?

      Essentially, nothing will ever be “complete”. Thanks for listening to my rant on semantics.

      • DarkMatterStyx
        link
        21 year ago

        That was a lovely rant on semantics. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it!

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      you can read pretty much (except the lost media like those lost in library burnings , film destruction and wars) read any book written by humans since 2500 bce (example Rig Veda the first ved of Hinduism was written even before 2500 and is today said to be 98% at its original state thanks to Indian gurus and saints who passed it on orally and was made into a book only after 8th century) , watch any movie ever released , hear any music ever made after recording was invented .

      ofcourse there is a catch that these medias are not freely and publicly available and most you have to pirate in order to consume it thus we need to have a centralised database of these things safely kept somewhere so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel in case of a catastrophic event .

  • Cyclohexane
    link
    fedilink
    71 year ago

    I’m surprised no one mentioned projects like libgen and scihub. They are much better than Wikipedia imo.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      imo zlib is much better but they keep changing their domain … also sci hub is only for research papers which most people can understand