[parent5446]

I wish more people considered donating to Mozilla, Wikipedia, and other similar movements. I feel like many non-technical oriented people don't really understand that the software and websites they use are often times built completely with donated money, and cannot survive without it.

[dingaling]

Wikipedia is big, stable, midly incremental and dominant[0]. Does it need more money that its current baseload income?

If we applied the same traits to the browser market we'd be crying-out for an alternative.

I don't know what that alternative is, so it's difficult to donate towards it. But I don't believe that encouraging more donations to Wikipedia is going to move collective human knowledge forward.

In contrast, Mozilla is constantly having to chase new technological targets and compete against well-funded corporate alternatives. I can understand why they need to keep expanding their income.

[0] deliberately setting-aside all the other subjective complaints about its internal processes.

[vlehto]

Alternative would be encyclopedia Britannica. There every article is mostly behind paywall.

Wikipedia is dominant because it's better. They need money to keep servers running. If they don't get funding, they will simply die. There is no guarantee that similar project would ever fly again.