Watch Duty is real-time wildfire tracking and alert platform. It utilizes a combination of official data sources and human monitoring by experienced volunteers, including active and retired firefighters, dispatchers, and first responders. The service is operated by Sherwood Forestry Service, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. In 2025, Watch Duty had 48 full-time employees and approximately 250 volunteers who reported on over 13,000 wildfires. == History == Watch Duty was launched in August 2021 by John Mills, who experienced a wildfire shortly after he moved to Sonoma County, California. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) was unable to provide updates more than once a day due to time constraints, and residents of the area were unable to monitor the progression of the wildfire. Mills discovered that updates were being shared on social media by volunteers following radio scanners, and developed the Watch Duty app to make the information more readily available. It launched with a volunteer staff of "citizen information officers," initially serving Sonoma County before expanding to all of California in June 2022. As of December 2024, the service covered 22 states west of the Mississippi River. During the January 2025 Southern California wildfires, Watch Duty was downloaded millions of times, ranking among the most popular free downloads on the iOS App Store. On December 1st, 2025, Watch Duty announced an expansion to all 50 U.S. states. == App == The application is centered around an interactive map based on OpenStreetMap data with a variety of overlays visualizing fire risk, active fires and evacuation zones, weather conditions, and air quality observations. Watch Duty sources wildfire information from radio scanner transmissions, firefighters, sheriffs, and CAL FIRE publications. It has policies against the publication of personally identifiable information, such as the names of fire victims. Watch Duty is free to use, doesn't require users to sign up, and doesn't display ads.
Speech recognition
Speech recognition (automatic speech recognition (ASR), computer speech recognition, or speech-to-text (STT)) is a sub-field of computational linguistics concerned with methods and technologies that translate spoken language into text or other interpretable forms. Speech recognition applications include voice user interfaces, where the user speaks to a device, which "listens" and processes the audio. Common voice applications include interpreting commands for calling, call routing, home automation, and aircraft control. These applications are called direct voice input. Productivity applications include searching audio recordings, creating transcripts, and dictation. Speech recognition can be used to analyse speaker characteristics, such as identifying native language using pronunciation assessment. Voice recognition (speaker identification) refers to identifying the speaker, rather than speech contents. Recognizing the speaker can simplify the task of translating speech in systems trained on a specific person's voice. It can also be used to authenticate the speaker as part of a security process. == History == Applications for speech recognition developed over many decades, with progress accelerated due to advances in deep learning and the use of big data. These advances are reflected in an increase in academic papers, and greater system adoption. Key areas of growth include vocabulary size, more accurate recognition for unfamiliar speakers (speaker independence), and faster processing speed. === Pre-1970 === 1952 – Bell Labs researchers, Stephen Balashek, R. Biddulph, and K. H. Davis, built Audrey for single-speaker digit recognition. Their system located the formants in the power spectrum of each utterance. 1960 – Gunnar Fant developed and published the source–filter model of speech production. 1962 – IBM's 16-word "Shoebox" machine's speech recognition debuted at the 1962 World's Fair. 1966 – Linear predictive coding, a speech coding method, was proposed by Fumitada Itakura of Nagoya University and Shuzo Saito of Nippon Telegraph and Telephone. 1969 – Funding at Bell Labs came to a halt for several years after the company's head engineer, John R. Pierce, wrote an open letter criticizing speech recognition research. This defunding lasted until Pierce retired and James L. Flanagan took over. Raj Reddy was the first person to work on continuous speech recognition, as a graduate student at Stanford University in the late 1960s. Previous systems required users to pause after each word. Reddy's system issued spoken commands for playing chess. Around this time, Soviet researchers invented the dynamic time warping (DTW) algorithm and used it to create a recognizer capable of operating on a 200-word vocabulary. DTW processed speech by dividing it into short frames (e.g. 10 ms segments) and treating each frame as a unit. Speaker independence, however, remained unsolved. === 1970–1990 === 1971 – DARPA funded a five-year speech recognition research project, Speech Understanding Research, seeking a minimum vocabulary size of 1,000 words. The project considered speech understanding a key to achieving progress in speech recognition, which was later disproved. BBN, IBM, Carnegie Mellon (CMU), and Stanford Research Institute participated. 1972 – The IEEE Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing group held a conference in Newton, Massachusetts. 1976 – The first ICASSP was held in Philadelphia, which became a major venue for publishing on speech recognition. During the late 1960s, Leonard Baum developed the mathematics of Markov chains at the Institute for Defense Analysis. A decade later, at CMU, Raj Reddy's students James Baker and Janet M. Baker began using the hidden Markov model (HMM) for speech recognition. James Baker had learned about HMMs while at the Institute for Defense Analysis. HMMs enabled researchers to combine sources of knowledge, such as acoustics, language, and syntax, in a unified probabilistic model. By the mid-1980s, Fred Jelinek's team at IBM created a voice-activated typewriter called Tangora, which could handle a 20,000-word vocabulary. Jelinek's statistical approach placed less emphasis on emulating human brain processes in favor of statistical modelling. (Jelinek's group independently discovered the application of HMMs to speech.) This was controversial among linguists since HMMs are too simplistic to account for many features of human languages. However, the HMM proved to be a highly useful way for modelling speech and replaced dynamic time warping as the dominant speech recognition algorithm in the 1980s. 1982 – Dragon Systems, founded by James and Janet M. Baker, was one of IBM's few competitors. === Practical speech recognition === The 1980s also saw the introduction of the n-gram language model. 1987 – The back-off model enabled language models to use multiple-length n-grams, and CSELT used HMM to recognize languages (in software and hardware, e.g. RIPAC). At the end of the DARPA program in 1976, the best computer available to researchers was the PDP-10 with 4 MB of RAM. It could take up to 100 minutes to decode 30 seconds of speech. Practical products included: 1984 – the Apricot Portable was released with up to 4096 words support, of which only 64 could be held in RAM at a time. 1987 – a recognizer from Kurzweil Applied Intelligence 1990 – Dragon Dictate, a consumer product released in 1990. AT&T deployed the Voice Recognition Call Processing service in 1992 to route telephone calls without a human operator. The technology was developed by Lawrence Rabiner and others at Bell Labs. By the early 1990s, the vocabulary of the typical commercial speech recognition system had exceeded the average human vocabulary. Reddy's former student, Xuedong Huang, developed the Sphinx-II system at CMU. Sphinx-II was the first to do speaker-independent, large vocabulary, continuous speech recognition, and it won DARPA's 1992 evaluation. Handling continuous speech with a large vocabulary was a major milestone. Huang later founded the speech recognition group at Microsoft in 1993. Reddy's student Kai-Fu Lee joined Apple, where, in 1992, he helped develop the Casper speech interface prototype. Lernout & Hauspie, a Belgium-based speech recognition company, acquired other companies, including Kurzweil Applied Intelligence in 1997 and Dragon Systems in 2000. L&H was used in Windows XP. L&H was an industry leader until an accounting scandal destroyed it in 2001. L&H speech technology was bought by ScanSoft, which became Nuance in 2005. Apple licensed Nuance software for its digital assistant Siri. ==== 2000s ==== In the 2000s, DARPA sponsored two speech recognition programs: Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-Text (EARS) in 2002, followed by Global Autonomous Language Exploitation (GALE) in 2005. Four teams participated in EARS: IBM; a team led by BBN with LIMSI and the University of Pittsburgh; Cambridge University; and a team composed of ICSI, SRI, and the University of Washington. EARS funded the collection of the Switchboard telephone speech corpus, which contained 260 hours of recorded conversations from over 500 speakers. The GALE program focused on Arabic and Mandarin broadcast news. Google's first effort at speech recognition came in 2007 after recruiting Nuance researchers. Its first product, GOOG-411, was a telephone-based directory service. Since at least 2006, the U.S. National Security Agency has employed keyword spotting, allowing analysts to index large volumes of recorded conversations and identify speech containing "interesting" keywords. Other government research programs focused on intelligence applications, such as DARPA's EARS program and IARPA's Babel program. In the early 2000s, speech recognition was dominated by hidden Markov models combined with feed-forward artificial neural networks (ANN). Later, speech recognition was taken over by long short-term memory (LSTM), a recurrent neural network (RNN) published by Sepp Hochreiter & Jürgen Schmidhuber in 1997. LSTM RNNs avoid the vanishing gradient problem and can learn "Very Deep Learning" tasks that require memories of events that happened thousands of discrete time steps earlier, which is important for speech. Around 2007, LSTMs trained with Connectionist Temporal Classification (CTC) began to outperform. In 2015, Google reported a 49 percent error‑rate reduction in its speech recognition via CTC‑trained LSTM. Transformers, a type of neural network based solely on attention, were adopted in computer vision and language modelling, and then to speech recognition. Deep feed-forward (non-recurrent) networks for acoustic modelling were introduced in 2009 by Geoffrey Hinton and his students at the University of Toronto, and by Li Deng and colleagues at Microsoft Research. In contrast to the prioer incremental improvements, deep learning decreased error rates by 30%. Both shallow and deep forms (e.g., recurrent nets) of ANNs had been explored since the 1980s. Howev
Thinking Machines Lab
Thinking Machines Lab Inc. is an American artificial intelligence (AI) startup founded by Mira Murati, the former chief technology officer of OpenAI. The company was founded in February 2025, and by July had completed an early-stage funding round led by Andreessen Horowitz, raising $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion overall from investors such as Nvidia, AMD, Cisco, and Jane Street. The company is based in San Francisco and structured as a public benefit corporation. == History == By its launch in February 2025, Thinking Machines Lab was reported to have hired about 30 researchers and engineers from competitors including OpenAI, Meta AI, and Mistral AI. Its founding team members include Barret Zoph, former OpenAI VP of Research (Post-Training), Lilian Weng, former OpenAI VP, and OpenAI cofounder John Schulman, who joined after a brief stint at the lab's competitor Anthropic. In January 2026, it was reported that Barret Zoph and Luke Metz, departed the startup to return to OpenAI. Other former OpenAI employees who have been hired include Jonathan Lachman and Andrew Tulloch (although Tulloch departed after getting recruited for Meta Superintelligence Labs). Thinking Machines Lab's advisers include Bob McGrew, previously OpenAI's chief research officer, and Alec Radford, who was a lead researcher for OpenAI. On October 1, 2025, it announced Tinker, an API for fine-tuning language models. Users would submit jobs through the API for fine-tuning one of the various open-weight models supported. The Lab would run the jobs on its internal clusters and training infrastructure. == Business structure == Thinking Machines Lab grants Mira Murati a deciding vote on board matters, weighted to provide her with a majority decision-making capability. Additionally, founding shareholders possess votes weighted 100 times greater than those of regular shareholders. In July 2025, Andreessen Horowitz was reported to have led the company's initial funding round, raising "about $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion". The government of Albania (Murati's country of origin) was also included in this round, making a $10 million investment which required an amendment to the country's 2025 budget. == Partnership == In March 2026, Thinking Machines Lab announced a strategic partnership with NVIDIA involving an undisclosed investment and a multi-year agreement to deploy one gigawatt of Vera Rubin computing capacity.
Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act
The Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act is a piece of legislation introduced by California Representative Adam Schiff in the United States Congress on April 9, 2024. It concerns the transparency of companies regarding their use of copyrighted work to train their generative artificial intelligence (AI) models. The legislation requires the submission of a notice regarding the identity and the uniform resource locator (URL) address of the copyrighted works used in the training data to the Register of Copyrights at least 30 days before the public release of the new or updated version of the AI model; it does not ban the use of copyrighted works for AI training. The bill's requirements would apply retroactively to prior AI models. Violation penalties would start at US$5,000. The legislation does not have a maximum penalty assessment that can be charged. The bill by Schiff was introduced a few days after The New York Times published an article regarding the business activities of major tech firms, including Google and Meta, in the training of their generative AI platforms on April 6, 2024. The legislation is supported by the Professional Photographers of America (PPA), SAG-AFTRA, the Writers Guild of America, the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and others.
Plinian Core
Plinian Core is a set of vocabulary terms that can be used to describe different aspects of biological species information. Under "biological species Information" all kinds of properties or traits related to taxa—biological and non-biological—are included. Thus, for instance, terms pertaining descriptions, legal aspects, conservation, management, demographics, nomenclature, or related resources are incorporated. == Description == The Plinian Core is aimed to facilitate the exchange of information about the species and upper taxa. What is in scope? Species level catalogs of any kind of biological objects or data. Terminology associated with biological collection data. Striving for compatibility with other biodiversity-related standards. Facilitating the addition of components and attributes of biological data. What is not in scope? Data interchange protocols. Non-biodiversity-related data. Occurrence level data. This standard is named after Pliny the Elder, a very influential figure in the study of the biological species. Plinian Core design requirements includes: ease of use, to be self-contained, able to support data integration from multiple databases, and ability to handle different levels of granularity. Core terms can be grouped in its current version as follows: Metadata Base Elements Record Metadata Nomenclature and Classification Taxonomic description Natural history Invasive species Habitat and Distribution Demography and Threats Uses, Management and Conservation associatedParty, MeasurementOrFact, References, AncillaryData == Background == Plinian Core started as a collaborative project between Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad and GBIF Spain in 2005. A series of iterations in which elements were defined and implanted in different projects resulted in a "Plinian Core Flat" [deprecated]. As a result, a new development was impulse to overcome them in 2012. New formal requirements, additional input and a will to better support the standard and its documentation, as well as to align it with the processes of TDWG, the world reference body for biodiversity information standards. A new version, Plinian Core v3.x.x was defined. This provides more flexibility to fully represent the information of a species in a variety of scenarios. New elements to deal with aspects such as IPR, related resources, referenced, etc. were introduced, and elements already included were better-defined and documented. Partner for the development of Plinian Core in this new phase incorporated the University of Granada (UG, Spain), the Alexander von Humboldt Institute (IAvH, Colombia), the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (Conabio, Mexico) and the University of São Paulo (USP, Brazil). A "Plinian Core Task Group" within TDWG "Interest Group on species Information" was constituted and currently working on its development. == Levels of the standard == Plinian Core is presented in to levels: the abstract model and the application profiles. The abstract model (AM), comprising the abstract model schema(xsd) and the terms' URIs, is the normative part. It is all comprehensive, and allows for different levels of granularity in describing species properties. The AM should be taken as a "menu" from which to choose terms and level of detail needed in any specific project. The subsets of the abstract model intended to be implemented in specific projects are the "application profiles" (APs). Besides containing part of the elements of the AM, APs can impose additional specifications on the included elements, such as controlled vocabularies. Some examples of APs in use follow: Application profile CONABIO Application profile INBIO Application profile GBIF.ES Application profile Banco de Datos de la Naturaleza.Spain Application profile SIB-COLOMBIA == Relation to other standards == Plinian incorporates a number of elements already defined by other standards. The following table summarizes these standards and the elements used in Plinian Core:
NCAA transfer portal
The NCAA transfer portal is a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) application, database, and compliance tool that facilitates student athletes' transfers between member institutions. It is intended to bring greater transparency to the transfer process and to enable student athletes to publicize their desire to transfer. The transfer portal is an NCAA-wide database covering all three NCAA divisions, although most media coverage of the transfer portal involves its use in the top-level Division I (D-I). The portal launched on October 15, 2018. Regulations adopted in 2021 allowed student-athletes in D-I football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey, and baseball to transfer schools using the portal once without sitting out a year. In 2024, the NCAA authorized athletes unlimited transfers. == Process == For Divisions I and II, once an athlete desiring to transfer informs their school; the school must enter the athlete's name in the database within two business days. Then coaches and staff from other universities may contact the athlete about potentially transferring. Before the January 2026 NCAA convention, Division III schools were allowed, but not required, to enter such a student into the portal. A proposal to require use of the portal in that division was approved at the convention. The timeline for D-III members to enter athletes into the portal differs from that of the other divisions. Athletes wishing to enter the portal must first complete an educational module. Once completed, the school has seven calendar days to enter the athlete's transfer request into the portal. == Transfer windows == On August 31, 2022, the D-I board adopted a series of changes to transfer rules, introducing the concept of transfer windows, similar to those used in professional soccer worldwide. Student-athletes who wish to take advantage of the one-time transfer rule must, under normal circumstances, enter the portal within a designated window for their sport. These windows are slightly different for each NCAA sport, but are broadly grouped by the NCAA's three athletic "seasons". At that time, the windows were as follows: Fall sports – A 45-day winter window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport, and a spring window from May 1–15. According to the NCAA, "reasonable accommodations" would be made for participants in football's FBS and FCS championship games (respectively the College Football Playoff National Championship and Division I Football Championship Game), both of which take place in early January. Participants in those games had a 14-day window opening on the day after the championship game, as well as the spring window. Winter sports – A 60-day window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. Spring sports – A winter window from December 1–15, and a 45-day spring window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. For sports included in the NCAA Emerging Sports for Women program, transfer windows are the same as those for fully recognized NCAA sports. As with fully recognized NCAA sports, transfer windows linked to championship events open on the day after selections are made for the generally recognized championship events in emerging sports. Student-athletes whose athletic aid is reduced, canceled, or not renewed by their school, as well as those affected by a university's elimination of a sports team, may enter the transfer portal at any time without penalty. A slightly different exception applies to those undergoing a head coaching change; student-athletes so affected in sports other than Division I football can enter the portal within 30 days of the change, starting on the day after the coach's departure is announced. The coaching change window also applied to Division I football before October 2025. Less than a month after transfer windows were adopted, the Division I Council adopted a change that affected only graduate transfers. Student-athletes who are set to graduate with remaining athletic eligibility, and plan to continue competition as postgraduate students, were exempt from transfer windows. They could enter the portal at any time during the academic year, and were not subject to the standard deadlines of May 1 for fall and winter sports and July 1 for spring sports. In April 2024, graduate transfers became subject to the same deadlines as all other transfer students. This change did not affect windows for student-athletes affected by a head coaching change, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team. Because the Ivy League allows neither redshirting nor athletic participation by graduate students, athletes at its member schools who are set to complete four years of attendance but still have remaining athletic eligibility may enter the portal at any time during their fourth academic year of attendance. In October 2024, the Division I Council reduced transfer windows in football and basketball to a total of 30 days. For FBS and FCS football, the fall window opened for 20 days, starting on the Monday after FBS conference championship games. Participants in postseason play had a 5-day window that opened on the day after each team's final game. A 10-day spring window opened in mid-April. In men's and women's basketball, a single 30-day window opens on the day after the second round of each Division I tournament concludes. The existing exceptions regarding head coaching changes, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team remained in place. Almost exactly a year later, Division I adopted more significant changes to the football transfer portal for both FBS and FCS. The previous two windows were abolished and replaced by a single window that opens from January 2–16. Participants in the College Football Playoff National Championship—the only game in FBS or FCS played after the closure of the new window—receive a 5-day window that opens on the day after that game. The window for players undergoing a head coaching change was also reduced. A new window of 15 days opens five calendar days after the hiring or public announcement of a new head coach. Should a school fail to hire or publicly announce a new head coach within 30 days after the previous coach's departure, the window will open on the 31st day after departure, provided that the 31st day is no earlier than January 3. This particular window, also open for 15 days, may open at any time before June 30. No change was announced to the exceptions for those affected by a loss of athletic aid or the discontinuation of a team. == Impact on high school recruiting == Effective July 1, 2025, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors implemented new DI roster limits following the court-approved House settlement. Additionally, according to the NCAA, "NCAA rules for Division I programs will no longer include sport-specific scholarship limits." As a result, many top Division I programs, especially those in power conferences, are relying heavily on the transfer portal to bring in conference- and national-level student-athletes. This shift in recruiting focus has already been exemplified across Division I men's and women's track and field especially, beginning in the recruitment cycle for 2025 college entries. Track and field coaches formerly managing rosters of 120-plus (60-plus men and 60-plus women) are now limited to 45 per side for a total of 90 roster spots across men's and women's track and field, meaning they are recruiting fewer student-athletes out of high school and more immediately impactful scholarship-worthy student-athletes via the transfer portal. Roster limits for track and field teams are even more stringent in the Southeastern Conference (SEC): 35 men and 35 women. For high school track and field athletes seeking opportunities with top DI programs, they no longer need to display potential to be point-scorers, but demonstrate the ability to contribute immediately, often by competing at a level aligned with conference scoring standards.
Predictions of the end of Wikipedia
Various observers have predicted the end of Wikipedia since it rose to prominence, with potential pitfalls from lack of quality-control, artificial intelligence or inconsistencies among contributors. Alternative online encyclopedias have been proposed as replacements for Wikipedia, including WolframAlpha, as well as the both now-defunct Knol (from Google) and Owl (from AOL). A 2013 review raised alarms regarding Wikipedia's shortcomings on hoaxes, on vandalism, an imbalance of material, and inadequate quality control of articles. Earlier critiques lamented the vulgar content and absence of sufficient references in articles. Others suggest that the unwarranted deletion of useful articles from Wikipedia may portend its end, which itself inspired the creation of the now inactive Deletionpedia. Contrary to such predictions, Wikipedia has constantly grown in both size and influence. Recent developments with artificial intelligence in Wikimedia projects have prompted new predictions that AI applications, which consume free and open content, will replace Wikipedia. == Personnel == Wikipedia is crowdsourced by a few million volunteer editors. Of the millions of registered editors, only tens of thousands contribute the majority of its contents, and a few thousand do quality control and maintenance work. As the encyclopedia expanded in the 2010s, the number of active editors did not grow proportionately. Various sources predicted that Wikipedia will eventually have too few editors to be functional and collapse from lack of participation. English Wikipedia has 818 volunteer administrators who perform various functions, including functions similar to those carried out by a forum moderator. Critics have described their actions as harsh, bureaucratic, biased, unfair, or capricious and predicted that the resulting outrage would lead to the site's closure. Various 2012 articles reported that a decline in English Wikipedia's recruitment of new administrators could end Wikipedia. === Decline in editors (2014–2015) === A 2014 trend analysis published in The Economist stated that "The number of editors for the English-language version has fallen by a third in seven years." The attrition rate for active editors in English Wikipedia was described by The Economist as substantially higher than in other (non-English) Wikipedias. It reported that in other languages, the number of "active editors" (those with at least five edits per month) has been relatively constant since 2008: some 42,000 editors, with narrow seasonal variances of about 2,000 editors up or down. In the English Wikipedia, the number of active editors peaked in 2007 at about 50,000 editors, and fell to 30,000 editors in 2014. Given that the trend analysis published in The Economist presented the number of active editors for non-English Wikipedias as remaining relatively constant, sustaining their numbers at approximately 42,000 active editors, the contrast pointed to the effectiveness of Wikipedia in those languages to retain their active editors on a renewable and sustained basis. Though different language versions of Wikipedia have different policies, no comment identified a particular policy difference as potentially making a difference in the rate of editor attrition for English Wikipedia. Editor count showed a slight uptick a year later, and no clear trend after that. In a 2013 article, Tom Simonite of MIT Technology Review said that for several years running, the number of Wikipedia editors had been falling, and cited the bureaucratic structure and rules as a factor. Simonite alleged that some Wikipedians use the labyrinthine rules and guidelines to dominate others and have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. A January 2016 article in Time by Chris Wilson said Wikipedia might lose many editors because a collaboration of occasional editors and smart software will take the lead. Andrew Lih and Andrew Brown both maintain editing Wikipedia with smartphones is difficult and discourages new potential contributors. Lih alleges there is serious disagreement among existing contributors on how to resolve this. In 2015, Lih feared for Wikipedia's long-term future while Brown feared problems with Wikipedia would remain and rival encyclopedias would not replace it. == Viewers and fundraisers == As of 2015, with more viewing by smartphones, there had been a marked decline in persons who viewed Wikipedia from their computers, and according to The Washington Post "[people are] far less likely to donate". At the time, the Wikimedia Foundation reported reserves equivalent to one year's budgeted expenditures. On the other hand, the number of paid staff had ballooned, so those expenses increased. In 2021, Andreas Kolbe, a former co-editor-in-chief of The Signpost, wrote that the Wikimedia Foundation was reaching its 10-year goal of a US$100 million endowment, five years earlier than planned, which may surprise donors and users around the world who regularly see Wikipedia fundraising banners. He also said accounting methods disguise the size of operating surpluses, top managers earn $300,000 – 400,000 a year, and over 40 people work exclusively on fundraising. == Artificial intelligence == Wikipedia faces a decline in human visitors, raising concerns about its long-term sustainability and community participation. The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), when reporting this decline, attributed this in part to the lack of clicks from users of large language models and search engines that are using content from Wikipedia. Data published in August 2025 showed that after the launch of ChatGPT and the rise of other AI-powered search summaries, some types of articles on Wikipedia — especially those that closely resemble the kind of content ChatGPT produces — experienced a noticeable drop in readership. Overall human pageviews reportedly fell by about 8% between 2024 and 2025, suggesting that AI-overviews and chatbots are increasingly being used in place of direct visits to Wikipedia. According to industry web analytics data, ChatGPT's estimated monthly web traffic surpassed that of Wikipedia since May 2025, as visits to ChatGPT continued to grow while Wikipedia’s total site traffic declined. == Timeline of predictions == On the eve of the 20th anniversary of Wikipedia, associate professor of the Department of Communication Studies at Northeastern University Joseph Reagle conducted a retrospective study of numerous "predictions of the ends of Wikipedia" over two decades, divided into chronological waves: "Early growth (2001–2002)", "Nascent identity (2001–2005)", "Production model (2005–2010)", "Contributor attrition (2009–2017)" and the current period "(2020–)". Each wave brought its distinctive fatal predictions, which never came true; as a result, Reagle concluded Wikipedia was not in danger. Concern grew in 2023 that the ubiquity and proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) may adversely affect Wikipedia. Rapid improvements and widespread application of AI may render Wikipedia obsolete or reduce its importance. A 2023 study found that AI, when applied to Wikipedia, works most efficiently for error-correction, while Wikipedia still needs to be written by humans.