On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hiya Bishakha
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
I have said, it is a matter of perspective how you view them. But if we go
by the assumption that editorial judgement is a separate thing,
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you want to make a valid counterargument, say that you are worried that
some censorious
ISPs and countries might use our category definitions as a starting point
for a bolt-on
censorship system that restricts access
FW-ing from Gender Gap ML (with the author permission.)
_
*Béria Lima*
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre
acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a
fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*
--
On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 03:21:45AM +0200, Kim Bruning wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 08:47:43PM +0530, Bishakha Datta wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Lodewijk
lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
^- apologies for leaving this quote-line in. I was replying to a quote
by Bishaka Datta.
Claiming copyright for religious works in use works also defense for
possible alteration the original publisher or editor may regard as
heretical. The similar happens in academia too. I know a certain
online text database based on a scanned PD works, but the publisher (a
certain academic society)
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
tolkiend...@gmail.com wrote:
In practical terms, what they can do? Wikipedia is hosted in US.
Therefore, for a successful takedown, the museum must sue in US.
Well, for one thing, they could sue reusers.
WMF using the work is one
Andreas Kolbe wrote:
We'd still be in good company, as all other major websites, including
Google, YouTube and Flickr, use equivalent systems, systems that are
widely accepted.
I'm going to simply copy and paste one of my earlier replies (from a
different thread):
Websites like Flickr (an
If the Museum of Israel or indeed anyone else was to sue someone reusing
data from a Wikimedia project, then obviously one would hope that the result
would endorse the community's view as to the copyright status of that data.
If a certain British art gallery told us they'd just discovered that one
On 09/21/2011 03:47 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
* Create en.safe.wikipedia.org […]
Then governments/ISPs/institutions could block unsafe-Wikipedia via DNS
blocks. This is, compared to DPI, quite easy.
Using en.wikipedia.org/safe/ might resolve this issue.
* Create safe.wikimedia.org. That would be
David,
You say that these organisations do what they do to maximise their profits. I
would counter
that they maximise their profits by serving their customers as well as they can
do. Serving
customers well is something that we should aspire to as well, regardless of
whether our
customers
Hi Björn,
excellent! We need experiements and creative ideas.
On 10/01/2011 02:46 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
This only works in recent desktop versions of Opera and Firefox and only
on devices where you can easily hover.
How good are chances it can be implemented in a feasible way for other
David Gerard wrote:
On 30 September 2011 13:40, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
First attempt at labeling content was made by Uwe Kils, and his class
of students collectively logging as Vikings or something of the sort
tagged content not suitable for teenst. Jimbo banned
MZMcBride wrote:
I'd forgotten all about Toby. That was largely a joke, wasn't it?
Do not try to define Toby. Toby might be a joke or he might be
serious. Toby might be watching over us right now or he might be a
bowl of porridge. Toby might be windmills or he might be giants.
Don't fight
David Levy wrote:
MZMcBride wrote:
I'd forgotten all about Toby. That was largely a joke, wasn't it?
Do not try to define Toby. Toby might be a joke or he might be
serious. Toby might be watching over us right now or he might be a
bowl of porridge. Toby might be windmills or he might
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 17:18, church.of.emacs.ml
church.of.emacs...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 09/21/2011 03:47 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
* Create en.safe.wikipedia.org […]
Then governments/ISPs/institutions could block unsafe-Wikipedia via DNS
blocks. This is, compared to DPI, quite easy.
Using
* church.of.emacs.ml wrote:
On 10/01/2011 02:46 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
This only works in recent desktop versions of Opera and Firefox and only
on devices where you can easily hover.
How good are chances it can be implemented in a feasible way for other
browsers?
Webkit-derived browsers
On 09/30/11 3:34 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
One final remark: I couldn't help but laugh a little when I read somewhere
that we are the experts, and we are making decisions for our readers - and
that these readers should have to take that whole complete story, because
what else is the use of having
On 09/30/11 9:41 AM, Theo10011 wrote:
I have never said, *ever*, led on I don't think girls should not be
educated about sexuality. I also grew up in a time when I had to find
sexual content by way of a pile of Playboys in my cousins bathroom,
watching MTV, and stealing my sisters copy of
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
(not responding to anyone in particular) I'm one of the people who tried to
participate in the discussion without taking a strong standpoint
(intentionally - because I'm quite nuanced on the issue, and open for good
19 matches
Mail list logo
