Re: [Wikimedia-l] DEITYBOUNCE and reader logs (was Re: Introducing Victoria Coleman, WMF Chief Technology Officer)

[Dario Taraborelli]

If you want to hear about the results of this research collaboration, or
have additional questions about the data collection approach or the
analysis, I invite you to come and join us at our upcoming showcase on
*Wednesday
11/16. *

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2016-November/005504.html

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Dario Taraborelli <
dtarabore...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:10 AM, James Salsman  wrote:
>
>> I assumed that when an affiliated researcher apart from Foundation
>> staff says, "we have the complete server logs for Wikipedia,"
>> amounting to 17 terabytes per month, that means they possess the
>> information. I am glad to be wrong about that, but I object to the
>> implication that such an assumption based on the plain language of
>> the statement could possibly be made in bad faith.
>>
>
> I am glad we cleared that confusion.
>
>
>> > the terms of our formal collaborations
>> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Formal_collaborations
>> > prohibit the sharing of any raw data containing PII (such as
>> > webrequest logs) outside of WMF operated servers,
>>
>> There is nothing on that page which suggests that prohibition.
>>
>
> You're correct that that document doesn't describe in detail the data
> access process. When we start a formal collaboration under an NDA, we have
> an onboarding process that gives researchers restricted access to our
> cluster, covers server access responsibilities and best practices around
> the handling of private data. I'll check with our Legal and Security team
> if we can better document this process.
>
>
>> > as well as the retention of any such data past our data retention
>> > period https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data_retention_guidelines
>>
>> That page says, "Information (including personal information)
>> collected through participation in a survey or other research
>> conducted by the Wikimedia Foundation will be retained indefinitely
>> for educational, development, or other related purposes, unless
>> otherwise indicated in the privacy policy or statement of such
>> survey or research."
>>
>
> This is for surveys requesting explicit (*opt in*) consent to collect and
> retain specific types of data (such as demographic information) from
> participants, not for data collected by default via our webrequest logs.
> Webrequest logs and instrumentation data is purged/sanitized by default
> within a the 90-day retention window, most often the data sits on our
> servers for a much shorter time and is removed in a shorter time frame.
>
>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2016_Strat
>> egy/Draft_WMF_Strategy=15467086=15466763
>> says that the Foundation's standard research NDAs include an
>> "obligation to return or destroy any copies of confidential
>> information the individual may have upon request by WMF"
>>
>> Does that not imply that such copies are allowed in general?
>>
>
> IANAL so I can't comment on that but I believe this is a clause that's
> part of our NDA to avoid confidential information (not specifically PII) to
> be retained by third parties past the terms of the NDA.
>
>
>> I hope we can move forward to a solution to the general problem.
>>
>> Is there any legitimate research or any other need to save IP
>> addresses associated with HTTP GET web logs to disk prior to
>> creating a secure hash of them?
>>
>
> these are considerations that the analytics / ops team are best suited to
> answer, I encourage you to relay them to analytics-l if you want to have a
> more technical discussion.
>
> HTH,
> Dario
>
>


-- 

*Dario Taraborelli  *Head of Research, Wikimedia Foundation
wikimediafoundation.org • nitens.org • @readermeter

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter to the new CTO

[rupert THURNER]

On Nov 9, 2016 20:26, "C. Scott Ananian"  wrote:
>
> I'm going to take the bait and respond in part, to defend the teams and
> projects I work with:
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
> wrote:
>
> > they are summarised by the four words
> >  *under-ambitious,
> > under-resourced, under-managed and under-performing*. The
VE/Parsoid/Flow
> > complex suffers from scope mismatch. As a vehicle for delivering a
WYSIWYG
> > editor and discussion board it is over-complex,
>
>
> I'll stop here.  I think it is poorly understood in the community how
> complex wikitext markup has been allowed to grow over the decades it has
> been under development.  There *is no specification for wikitext*.  We
have
> informal guides which omit most of the interesting corner cases, like,
say,
> priority between conflicting markup.  Take a look at
> http://spec.commonmark.org/ to see what a precise specification for a
*much
> simpler* markup language would look like.  As you read through the cases
in
> that spec, consider that if you translated most of the examples into
> wikitext, *literally no one knows what the expected output would be*.  The

To make the long story short I would really love and support any well
specified markup. If it is only for a part of the content and there is a
note on top which syntax the text follows I d love it too.

Rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter to the new CTO

[Pine W]

Hi Rogol,

I wish I could comment in depth. The one comment that I will make is that
Katherine's tone toward the community has generally been receptive, and so
far we (meaning WMF, the community, and the affiliates) have not had
large-scale conflicts since she became the interim ED, which I consider a
good thing and I would like to see continue. I have my own wish list for
Katherine, as I think you know. But I also feel we should be grateful that
so far, she seems to be making an effort to cooperate with the wishes of
the community / communities and the wishes of the affiliates in general.

Thanks,
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to review: Design Statement of Purpose

[Pine W]

Overall I like the statement on wiki. Quick question though: "rigorous
research" can be very time consuming, very expensive, and probably
difficult to do well given Wikimedia's vast number of languages, number of
projects, and multiple platforms. Could this be made more nuanced?

Other than that, I like what I see here.

Regards,

Pine


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Keegan Peterzell  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Over the past few months the Design team members at the Wikimedia
> Foundation (user experience [UX] designers, design researchers, user
> experience engineers, and communications) have been working with Arthur
> Richards from the Team Practices Group to identify the high-level themes
> that motivate design at the WMF. These themes have been turned into a brief
> statement of purpose, whose intent is to articulate the vision and purpose
> behind design at the WMF. This statement will influence the future
> direction of design work.
>
> At this point the stakeholders are ready for a review of the draft
> statement. The purpose of this review is to gather a common understanding
> of its purpose, and to identify any key themes that may be missing from the
> high-level discussion. On the wiki page for the statement, you'll find
> these themes and what they encompass in the "Background" section. If you
> have an observation, comment, or concern about what is listed there, please
> bring it up on the talk page. If it is relevant to the review and
> understanding of the statement, it will be looked at for future drafts. If
> there are comments about design and the design process in general, we'll
> hold on to those until a time when they can be addressed for the broader
> discussion of design in general.
>
> All that said, here are the links:
> * 
> * 
>
> We look forward to seeing you on the wiki.
> --
> Keegan Peterzell
> Technical Collaboration Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,