this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
279 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

86682 readers
3492 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Curiositymonger@reddthat.com 20 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Wikimedia is a not for profit foundation. Not a corporation.

[–] Carl@anarchist.nexus 19 points 23 hours ago

Not-for-profit is still a corporation, and the distinction simply means that they need to reinvest profits back into the company. A for-profit company can sit on massive amounts of stockpiled wealth, while a not-for-profit needs to find ways to reinvest that back into the company. To be clear, they can still sit on a lot of money. But all of their money needs to be earmarked for something, instead of just being a rainy day fund.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

Oh dude go look up it's business filings. Foundations are corporations

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 21 points 1 day ago

Being a non-profit doesn't make the org structure immune to greed.

I mean, Trump and kids had a non-profit.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

Open Ai at one point was one too…

This does not imply it is workers' owned or that it does not have ridiculously high payed managers.

[–] EggInDisguise@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Well if not because greed or shitty people in management, why oppose unionization?

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 hours ago

Control. Unions get a seat at the negotiating table. With a union things have to be done by mutual agreement, and the workers have recourse if things go wrong. Being a manager is much more powerful without a unionized workforce, finance notwithstanding.

They often personally take unionization as an insult or betrayal, so they try and get revenge using the one thing available to them at that stage. With overwhelming support, it's only a matter of time before the vote passes and they are forced to recognize the union.

This is not uncommon. Managers want to rule over people without restraint even in nonprofits.

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 4 points 22 hours ago

Greed or shitty people in management doesn't make something a corporation. There's plenty of anti-union efforts from the non-profit sector.