Re: [WikiEN-l] Privacy Study Looking for Volunteers
Wikipedia:Free speech (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech) is probably worth a read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech It's not directly about privacy but I think it clearly covers the ground that Wikipedia is a project to create an online encyclopedia, not an experiment in radical free speech. The system is set up to facilitate that goal. If you think that recording IP addresses is invasive, then you should probably be publishing your content on your own website, not Wikipedia. Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: In general people do not read privacy policies, nor do they understand what IP addresses are or what you can do with them. But if you recall, I simply stated that recording IP addresses is invasive. And it is. This is especially true when you know that your recordings are faciliating the active de-anonymization of people who are editing Wikipedia. Not just de-anonymization, but often public shaming. For WMF, the principle of neutrality clearly trumps the principles of privacy and free speech. For the NSA, substitute security for neutrality. It's hypocritical. Luckily, it's easy to fix. Just stuff the ip fields with random numbers and deal with the fallout. Stop tracking people. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: In order: 1. Yes, the WMF is suing the NSA. There are a few threads/blog posts about this people here can point you to. 2. Brian: The NSA needs to store data without the permission or consent of the people generating it, sometimes through forcible interception, decryption and the introduction and maintenance of software exploits that allow them to do this but also allow any other reasonably technical nation or non-nation actor who is paying attention to exploit the same vulnerability, keeping this data for an indefinite period, with very little legal or political oversight, in order to stop terrorism, where very little evidence exists that this has helped in any way. The WMF needs to store data for a 90 day period, which is explicitly set down in a privacy policy that is transparent, human-readable, linked from every edit interface, written with the involvement of the people whose data is being stored, administered by a committee of people who come from this population of editors, and explicitly sets out what the data may or may not be used for, even within the Wikimedia Foundation, in order to stop vandalism, where multiple scientific studies have validated the hypothesis that being able to make rangeblocks and prohibit sockpuppetry is beneficial to the community we are all a part of and the wider population of readers. That's what's actually going on, here. If you thing these situations are roughly analogous, that's your prerogative. If you think the storage of this data is unnecessary, I recommend you go to your local project and explain to them that being able to checkuser potential sockpuppets or hard-block users is not needed: gaining consensus there would be a good starting point to changing this. On 29 March 2015 at 11:57, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: Wikipedia is suing the NSA? Seriously? On 28 Mar 2015 11:23, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: It has worked up to now, but I'm thinking that, especially given Wikimedia is suing the NSA, it is no longer justifiable. If the NSA can't track citizens, Wikimedia shouldn't be tracking them either. Seems simple :) On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Francesco Ariis fa...@ariis.it wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 01:19:35PM -0400, Brian J Mingus wrote: I think it's rather curious that edits to Wikipedia aren't private. Why log the IP address? Why log anything? It's invasive. I guess it's a sensible choice against abuse (vandalism) while still allowing non registered users editing rights ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Privacy Study Looking for Volunteers
Hi Brian, Dox'ing yourself? That's a pretty wild hyperbole. But just to clarify: are you taking issue with the fact that not-logged-in users have their IP addresses publicly visible? Or with the fact that all edits have IP addresses privately recorded? I originally thought you were talking about the latter, but now I'm not sure. If it's actually the former, I've got no disagreement with you. Given that anyone can edit without making their IP public simply by registering a pseudonym and logging in, and given that many new editors might not be aware of the implications of revealing their IP (if they're editing from a static address at work, for instance), it seems to me that the easiest solution - and one which I think would cause absolutely zero astonishment in the minds of new users - would simply be to require users to register a pseudonym and log in in order to edit. But if you're concerned about the effect that this would have on casual drive-by fixes and improvements by people who aren't invested enough in the project to register, then sure, encrypt or hash the IP address before displaying it publicly. I don't think randomizing it on every edit would be a good idea, because I think it's important to be able to tell whether a succession of edits were from the same editor. Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: Wikipedia is set up such that if you don't take the measures mentioned in the OP, you are dox'ing yourself. Users are not aware of this. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:33 PM, David Carson carson63...@gmail.com wrote: Wikipedia:Free speech ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech) is probably worth a read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech It's not directly about privacy but I think it clearly covers the ground that Wikipedia is a project to create an online encyclopedia, not an experiment in radical free speech. The system is set up to facilitate that goal. If you think that recording IP addresses is invasive, then you should probably be publishing your content on your own website, not Wikipedia. Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: In general people do not read privacy policies, nor do they understand what IP addresses are or what you can do with them. But if you recall, I simply stated that recording IP addresses is invasive. And it is. This is especially true when you know that your recordings are faciliating the active de-anonymization of people who are editing Wikipedia. Not just de-anonymization, but often public shaming. For WMF, the principle of neutrality clearly trumps the principles of privacy and free speech. For the NSA, substitute security for neutrality. It's hypocritical. Luckily, it's easy to fix. Just stuff the ip fields with random numbers and deal with the fallout. Stop tracking people. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: In order: 1. Yes, the WMF is suing the NSA. There are a few threads/blog posts about this people here can point you to. 2. Brian: The NSA needs to store data without the permission or consent of the people generating it, sometimes through forcible interception, decryption and the introduction and maintenance of software exploits that allow them to do this but also allow any other reasonably technical nation or non-nation actor who is paying attention to exploit the same vulnerability, keeping this data for an indefinite period, with very little legal or political oversight, in order to stop terrorism, where very little evidence exists that this has helped in any way. The WMF needs to store data for a 90 day period, which is explicitly set down in a privacy policy that is transparent, human-readable, linked from every edit interface, written with the involvement of the people whose data is being stored, administered by a committee of people who come from this population of editors, and explicitly sets out what the data may or may not be used for, even within the Wikimedia Foundation, in order to stop vandalism, where multiple scientific studies have validated the hypothesis that being able to make rangeblocks and prohibit sockpuppetry is beneficial to the community we are all a part of and the wider population of readers. That's what's actually going on, here. If you thing these situations are roughly analogous, that's your prerogative. If you think the storage of this data is unnecessary, I recommend you go to your local project and explain to them that being able to checkuser potential sockpuppets or hard-block users is not needed: gaining consensus there would be a good starting point to changing this. On 29 March 2015 at 11:57, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: Wikipedia is suing the NSA? Seriously? On 28 Mar 2015 11:23, Brian J Mingus
Re: [WikiEN-l] Privacy Study Looking for Volunteers
Hi Brian, I'm still not entirely clear on your complaint. Are you talking about Wikimedia (not random users, nor Wikipedia Administrators) having access to IP addresses from system logs? Or something else? What does The IP address is helpful, but not necessary mean? Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: Hi David, It is a bit of hyperbole, but reductio arguments have their role in helping to make certain things clear. If you force users to log in, you can still identify them. The IP address is helpful, but not necessary. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 7:12 PM, David Carson carson63...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Brian, Dox'ing yourself? That's a pretty wild hyperbole. But just to clarify: are you taking issue with the fact that not-logged-in users have their IP addresses publicly visible? Or with the fact that all edits have IP addresses privately recorded? I originally thought you were talking about the latter, but now I'm not sure. If it's actually the former, I've got no disagreement with you. Given that anyone can edit without making their IP public simply by registering a pseudonym and logging in, and given that many new editors might not be aware of the implications of revealing their IP (if they're editing from a static address at work, for instance), it seems to me that the easiest solution - and one which I think would cause absolutely zero astonishment in the minds of new users - would simply be to require users to register a pseudonym and log in in order to edit. But if you're concerned about the effect that this would have on casual drive-by fixes and improvements by people who aren't invested enough in the project to register, then sure, encrypt or hash the IP address before displaying it publicly. I don't think randomizing it on every edit would be a good idea, because I think it's important to be able to tell whether a succession of edits were from the same editor. Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: Wikipedia is set up such that if you don't take the measures mentioned in the OP, you are dox'ing yourself. Users are not aware of this. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:33 PM, David Carson carson63...@gmail.com wrote: Wikipedia:Free speech ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech) is probably worth a read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Free_speech It's not directly about privacy but I think it clearly covers the ground that Wikipedia is a project to create an online encyclopedia, not an experiment in radical free speech. The system is set up to facilitate that goal. If you think that recording IP addresses is invasive, then you should probably be publishing your content on your own website, not Wikipedia. Cheers, David... On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Brian J Mingus brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: In general people do not read privacy policies, nor do they understand what IP addresses are or what you can do with them. But if you recall, I simply stated that recording IP addresses is invasive. And it is. This is especially true when you know that your recordings are faciliating the active de-anonymization of people who are editing Wikipedia. Not just de-anonymization, but often public shaming. For WMF, the principle of neutrality clearly trumps the principles of privacy and free speech. For the NSA, substitute security for neutrality. It's hypocritical. Luckily, it's easy to fix. Just stuff the ip fields with random numbers and deal with the fallout. Stop tracking people. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: In order: 1. Yes, the WMF is suing the NSA. There are a few threads/blog posts about this people here can point you to. 2. Brian: The NSA needs to store data without the permission or consent of the people generating it, sometimes through forcible interception, decryption and the introduction and maintenance of software exploits that allow them to do this but also allow any other reasonably technical nation or non-nation actor who is paying attention to exploit the same vulnerability, keeping this data for an indefinite period, with very little legal or political oversight, in order to stop terrorism, where very little evidence exists that this has helped in any way. The WMF needs to store data for a 90 day period, which is explicitly set down in a privacy policy that is transparent, human-readable, linked from every edit interface, written with the involvement of the people whose data is being stored, administered by a committee of people who come from this population of editors, and explicitly sets out what the data may or may not be used for, even within the Wikimedia Foundation, in order to stop vandalism, where multiple scientific studies have validated the hypothesis
Re: [WikiEN-l] Psychological correlates of deletionism/inclusionism?
What were you hoping to see? Obviously, either some sound peer-reviewed research displaying that deletionists suffer from deep-seated psychological problems that make them clinically unfit to work on a collaborative project; or some sound peer-reviewed research displaying that inclusionists suffer from some other, similarly severe, deep-seated psychological problems. I'm not sure which of the two you're fishing for, though. Cheers, David... On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 1:53 AM, Gwern Branwen gw...@gwern.net wrote: On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: I'm waiting for extreme inclusionists or deletionists to produce some high-quality, not-at-all bullshit research that shows that failure to adhere to their preferred philosophy is something that shows a deep psychological tendency to rape kittens. That'll elevate the debate, I'm sure. On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Obviously toilet training is involved. That is the source of the anal personality. Need a study of toilet training of future editors... Thanks for your contributions, guys, they were really helpful and not at all completely useless and off-topic and exactly what I was hoping not to see. -- gwern http://www.gwern.net ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia in albanian
Hi, Is http://sq.wikipedia.org/ what you are looking for, by any chance? It apparently has 43,000 articles, which is not one of the larger Wikipedia languages by any means. But perhaps you can help! Cheers, David... On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Muhamed Mehmeti medi.mehm...@hotmail.comwrote: With all respect that Ihave for your valuable site,and with no intention to misrespect any other language,I ask you why is missing wikipedia in albanian since you have more readers among albanians,than bosnians,macedonians,and many others cause we are as you know majority in two countries,Albania and Kosovo.I hope you will cooperate with somebody in the future about this issue,best regards ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] English Wikipedia blackout
Personally I intend to get all of my information for the day from Conservapedia. So by the end of the day I expect I'll be ready to take to the streets _defending_ SOPA. Cheers, David... On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:09 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Citizendium will *clean up* tomorrow. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Julia Hartley-Brewer
I notice that it was recently worked over by a user named Juliahb who has no other contributions. One would assume that this is indeed the subject of the article. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julia_Hartley-Breweraction=historysubmitdiff=438961393oldid=438725771 On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: BLP; not a single source cited, and tagged for 16 months. Anyone care to take this on? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Julia Hartley-Brewer
Oh, I agree. By the way, there was one reference in the version prior to
that edit,
probably removed accidentally, as happens when new editors that don't know
WP
markup edit an article.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
David Carson wrote:
I notice that it was recently worked over by a user named Juliahb
who has no other contributions.
One would assume that this is indeed the subject of the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julia_Hartley-Breweraction=historysubmitdiff=438961393oldid=438725771
I can believe that, and perhaps a friendly {{welcome}} and COI warning
would
be apt; but the point is that the article is completely unsourced. I'd do
it
myself, but...
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
BLP; not a single source cited, and tagged for 16 months. Anyone
care to take this on?
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Amazonified Wikipedia
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.com wrote: Also on the example page linked (James Joyce) you can of course just scroll down to the Project Gutenberg link and get most of his works for free! Although they did think to remove the Wikisource link. To be fair, for the works of James Joyce which are out of copyright and thus available from Project Gutenberg, Amazon also has Kindle editions for $0.00, so it's not as if they're afraid of free digital copies of public domain works. Cheers, David... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Amazonified Wikipedia
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:56 AM, wiki doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote: Yeah, but my odds of getting a Kindle gratis from their benevolence are?? It's a bit like applauding the Ritz Hotel for giving away free coffee with a $150 meal. A Kindle is a physical object that costs money to produce. Hence they are sold for money. The early works of James Joyce are public domain content which can be digitally duplicated infinitely for no significant cost. Hence they are given away for free, both by benevolent organizations such as Project Gutenberg, and by for-profit corporations such as Amazon. What point, exactly, are you trying to make? Cheers, David... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Bible websites
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:52 AM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Charles Matthewscharles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: On the other hand, why is a Wikipedia article citing a Bible verse? Because in spite of their dominant representation, its the Wikipedia and not the Atheistpedia. Did you actually read Charles' message, or just stop after the first sentence to fire off a reply? He wasn't saying why on earth would Wikipedia be citing the BIBLE?!, he was saying that you need to look at the reason for the citation because that may well affect your choice of which version to cite. Cheers, David... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
