To be honest I have some problems explaining what I mean, which might be why I can't find a solution or explanaition for it.

I use firefox on Linux and out of habit i highlight text while reading it. I always did that and it helps me to read a lot faster and to relax my eyes while reading. It's something i don't think i can get rid of, even if I tried, it's just so deeply burned in.
As well I use to scroll the text I'm reading to the top out of the same reasons or maybe it's just habit as well, but I realised I cannot get rid of it as well :-)

So no to my problem:
Usually this works flawless, i can highlight text and have the cursor where I'm reading in the topmost visible line. But for some strange reason this does not work in the "new" wikipedia layout. where if I highlight text in the upper third of the page it scrolls upwards quite fast which just fucks up everything and makes my day bad. (this behaviour is not present in the old design which e.g. the germand wikipedia still uses)

Is it me?
Is it my browser?
Is there a way to get rid of this, so I can keep my workflow while reading and learing on wikipedia? Is somebody else observing this behaviour?
Where can I even start to look for a solution? I don't even know what to look for.

It truly bothers me, as I'm close to every day on it, and it might be my favorite website.
I heard there is a way to switch to the old wikipedia layout, which might be a workaround. But I actually like the new Layout a lot, so if there is a way to avoid that it would be great :-)

I received an email this morning from the good folks at the WHE entitled: Perplexity AI Partnership to Improve History Education

In it, their CEO Jan van der Crabben, writes:

As the most-visited history encyclopedia globally, World History Encyclopedia is pleased to announce a strategic partnership with Perplexity.ai.

…

As artificial intelligence (AI) tools based on large language models become increasingly accessible to the public, growing concerns have emerged regarding the quality of information provided by these tools. These AI systems are typically developed and trained using publicly available internet information, often without robust verification processes, and frequently generate inaccurate results.

There are also significant concerns about the business models of AI companies, which utilise content developed and meticulously checked by providers like World History Encyclopedia —a non-profit organisation— without obtaining proper consent, without providing compensation, and without offering appropriate attribution.

Perplexity.ai is an AI-powered search and answer engine that combines the capabilities of a search engine with artificial intelligence. Unlike most other AI systems, Perplexity clearly cites its sources, providing users with an easy way to verify the accuracy of its answers.

In alignment with our goal of being a trusted resource of accurate and objective historical information, we are excited about this partnership. It will allow us to develop tools based on the Perplexity API to make the content in World History Encyclopedia easier to find, browse, and access. We aim to develop educational AI tools for history learning in close collaboration with teachers to augment the World History Encyclopedia website for students.

The partnership will also enable World History Encyclopedia to use artificial intelligence to enhance our human review processes more efficiently. This includes improving tasks such as fact-checking and plagiarism detection.

Additionally, Perplexity is the first AI service that allows providers of information like World History Encyclopedia to be compensated fairly for the AI use of that information. We will receive a share of advertising revenue generated on the Perplexity platform whenever Perplexity cites World History Encyclopedia to answer a question.

I have worked with Jan and his staff many times over the last six years and I find them eminently trustworthy and dedicated to education.

What does everyone think of this kind of partnership moving forward? I understand Perplexity might have a slightly different approach that certain folks find promising.

And what kind of content do we think this might be able to generate? I look forward to your comments.

Personally, I like to check the South Park Controversies Page every now and then.

The page on Quantum Entanglement is fascinating and has so many rabbit hole links that lead to other rabbit holes themselves. I still go back and re-read them here and there to improve my understanding and check for laymen's updates without all pop-science nonsense you encounter elsewhere.

I'll come back and post a few more when I can think of them!

I say that after throwing some caution to air because I understand that every new thing has some initial resistance or pushback due to the "past comfort zone" effect.

But having said that, I feel the aesthetics of the old site was much better than the new one. But then again, I'm from the old-school world who also prefers old reddit to the new one in browsing experience, so my opinion could be biased! But even considering the modern web design, don't you think the black icons on the top right have a somewhat odd look? And the "21 languages" feels a bit verbose, the I10N icon already conveys what that dropdown is about? And finally, that scrollable sidebar on the left looks a tad ugly?

I just hope this is just a beta stage or something of Wikipedia's new version and a better one will evolve soon! But that's just one humble unpopular opinion, me thinks!

It can be your favorite for any reason: interesting subject, extremely in depth and well written, funny details, “branching potential” (it links to a lot of interesting topics you can branch off to), etc.