this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
147 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
40444 readers
137 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't actually include all the media, and -- I think -- edit history. It does give you a decent offline copy of the articles with at least the thumbnails of images though.
Edit: If you want all the media from Wikimedia Commons (which may also include files that are not in Wikipedia articles directly) the stats for that are:
according to their media statistics page.
Nice stats. I always wondered. I get the feeling that ~678 TB is little bit more than ~111 GB.
Like, at least 7GB bigger.
We need a drive that's at least... Three times this size!
Dear god, are we still using base 2 for file sizes? At least use TiB like a reasonable person.
It doesn't matter in this case, as long as it is documented (and it is by the unit).
To be clear, I'm fine with RAM being base 2 -- it's rather difficult for it not to be given the structure -- but for fixed storage, this is an old-school measurement that only gets worse with each order of magnitude.
Yes, we all do