Do you think?
I'm genuinely not sure.
I think that the difference in scale from what Google does with our data
and the general developer/researcher is pretty big. One million times big.
I actually think that "over-the-top" players like Google do actually
exploit free licensed materials like
Fantastic work, Anna!
Do you have the subtitles (*.srt) file so we can start translating the
subtitles? I'd like to translate in into Ukrainian and share here)
from Wikimedia Ukraine
Anna Torres writes:
> Dear all,
> Wikimedia Argentina has been
Great work, Anna.
from Bengali Wikipedia community
On 16 Jan 2016 18:34, "Yury Bulka" wrote:
> Fantastic work, Anna!
> Do you have the subtitles (*.srt) file so we can start translating the
> subtitles? I'd like to translate in
If we are concerned about Google taking unfair advantage of Wikipedia, one
simple solution is to allow content donations with a non-commercial
restriction. Right now, the concept of "free" include commercial use. An added
bonus to this is that we would get a lot more institutional donations of
> Looking for additional revenue sources isn't a bad idea, but charging for
> premium access is likely to annoy the community to a degree that will make
> the great Visual Editor revolt look like some quiet and polite murmuring.
That's definitely a conversation worth having, as it helps us
On 16 January 2016 at 22:09, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> Do we want to charge for knowledge? Of course not. But do we want to be
> able to introduce cool new tools for everyone faster, because e.g. Google
> is willing to pay for their development if they can use it for some
Hmm. The majority of those crawlers are from search engines - the very
search engines that keep us in the top 10 of their results (and often in
the top 3), thus leading to the usage and donations that we need to
survive. If they have to pay, then they might prefer to change their
Folks (WMF board, and those closely related), do we really have to hold a
vote of no confidence to get your attention? Do you have any doubt that
Absent that, please start listening to the volunteers. Listening, as in
doing what they'd like you to do. Otherwise, I'll be putting forth
What a delight! A truly glorious commemoration. Thanks to Cassie T and to
Asaf for sharing this with us, transmuting prose to timeless poetry.
On Jan 16, 2016 18:32, "Asaf Bartov" wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Johan Jönsson
I have been recently investigating business models for community based
and collaborative online services. You do not have to reinvent the
wheel (or discussions), there is some experience in this field from
other projects. So, to move the discussion away from just opinions and
What a delight!
For those who love iterations, the sonneto of Wikipedia itself:
In many cases this is very far
are written in a form that deviates
from an assumption that conceptions are
been sold for use in the United States.
A "flagged revisions" system can prevent
> On 16 Jan 2016, at 18:39, Alex Monk wrote:
> On 16 January 2016 at 10:08, Yury Bulka
>> MZMcBride writes:
>>> A few years ago, the Wikimedia Foundation switched over to the Google
If we are running dedicated services for free on behalf of a major search
engine as part of our symbiotic relationship with them, then kudos to Lila
for putting it on the trustees agenda and getting some discussion in the
I can understand how we get into a situation where a known major
Oh, this video is amazing! It could make a great introduction as background
information for an educational talk, and so much more :)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Claudia Garad
> Thanks for the resources Zack!
> Our project partner the
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Nurunnaby Chowdhury (Hasive) <
> Great! Thanks for sharing Anna!
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 5:10 AM, Samir Elsharbaty <
> > wrote:
> > Thanks for sharing, Anna!
"Imagine a world in which every single human being can freemiumly share
in the sum of all knowledge." XD
Il 16/01/2016 10:23, Pete Forsyth ha scritto:
I'm interested to hear some perspectives on the following line of thinking:
Lisa presented some alternative strategies for revenue needs for
The video was awesome. :-)
On 16 Jan 2016 13:47, "Lodewijk" wrote:
> Oh, this video is amazing! It could make a great introduction as background
> information for an educational talk, and so much more :)
> On Fri, Jan 15,
If an API license raised a meaningful amount of money then whoever bought
it would have some influence over the organisation, and if it didn't raise
a meaningful amount of money I doubt it would be worth doing.
There are other options that should be less contentious:
Emailing donors, explaining
What do they cost the foundation for their access? If they put up the costs
significantly in way of bandwidth or servers or anything like that, it would be
reasonable for them to support the extra costs.
Pete Forsyth wrote:
>Lisa presented some alternative strategies for revenue needs for the
>Foundation, including the possibility of charging for premium access to
>the services and APIs, expanding major donor and foundation fundraising,
>providing specific services for a fee, or limiting the
I agree with Todd on most, possibly all points, but if Google want to finance
faster access for their search engine, in way of hardware, software or
development, with no strings attached, as long as it puts no-one at a
disadvantage at the time or in future, then why not?
James Alexander wrote:
>I think everyone knows there are a lot of legitimate concerns to be
>concerned about and certainly Arnnon's actions at Google are legitimate
>for question however this whole "google is controlling the board/wmf"
>line of thought is turning into a huge and enormous
Pine W wrote:
>2. While I understand that some Board conversations are best held in
>private, for example conversations involving attorney-client privilege, I
>continue to believe that there is a misalignment between the democratic
>and open-source values of the Wikimedia movement and the limited
> A few years ago, the Wikimedia Foundation switched over to the Google Apps
> platform, which means that most e-mail sent on the wikimedia.org domain is
> now hosted by Google.
Are you sure? It doesn't look like wikimedia.org's MX point to google's
To share some context of the discussion the board had around this -- I
don't think the minutes give enough detail. APIs -- as we are freely and
rapidly creating them today are important, but are not quite at the core of
the issue we are facing.
Today Wikimedia is the largest internet channel for
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 4:09 PM MZMcBride wrote:
> Pete Forsyth wrote:
> >Lisa presented some alternative strategies for revenue needs for the
> >Foundation, including the possibility of charging for premium access to
> >the services and APIs, expanding major donor and
If anything the Wikimedia Foundation is about providing free access and
provide it to everyone who needs it on an equal basis. When this changes,
when people pay for superior service that is not available for everyone I
will really hate it and the people who had us deviate so much from where
I wonder how many ways there are to say "No"? Well, let's start with "no".
(My actual thoughts on this idea would probably get me put on moderation,
so I'll refrain.)
I helped build this project to be freely available to all reusers for all
purposes. The WMF's job should be to provide as many
Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> I've been also thinking about revitalizing our Advisory Board - the way I
> would like to see it would be dividing it into (a) community (b) tech and
> (c) academic subgroups, available for immediate consulting and feedback.
As Adam Wight recently pointed out on
To be perfectly honest, the biggest gift of Google is to recognise
Wikipedia as significant. I like to think that it is because of the
algorithms they use and even when it is not it is what makes Wikipedia
significant. When they value us not only through their algorithms and give
Thanks for raising this Pete. I am interested in both the ethics and
practicalities of this change, as a long established unpaid volunteer
Sorry to raise the obvious, but while Geshuri is on the board, someone
found in court to have acted *illegally* on behalf of Google resulting
I think if anyone were to pay, they should all pay at the same rate,
according to their usage.
Moreover, those whose usage is minimal should not pay at all. You might
have a threshold – say, if it's $X or less, no need to pay a dime.
So the Indian or African start-up would have access for free,
2016-01-16 19:21 GMT+01:00 Lila Tretikov :
> To share some context of the discussion the board had around this -- I
> don't think the minutes give enough detail. APIs -- as we are freely and
> rapidly creating them today are important, but are not quite at the core of
I agree, we shouldn't fee anything but a "reimburse" for the massive
usage of our hardware/networking resources would be ok.
Using over the tops' facilities would be great but it would also bring
to privacy concerns.
Finally if an over the top wants some further feature it can fund
On 16 January 2016 at 10:08, Yury Bulka
> MZMcBride writes:
> > A few years ago, the Wikimedia Foundation switched over to the Google
> > platform, which means that most e-mail sent on the wikimedia.org domain
> > now
Thank you for sharing this but, above all, to focus on digging real data.
IMHO we shouldn't forget our mission, so licenses must be as free as
possible. Turning into something "more closed" would definitely deplete
one of the most valuable source (the open source world) of volunteering
2016-01-16 20:40 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Selim :
> Isn't that the point of using free licence (not NC, nor ND) ? I guess we do
> to allow people/company/the world to reuse our content the way they want.
> If we have problem attracting people to our plateform, then the
Yury Bulka wrote:
>> A few years ago, the Wikimedia Foundation switched over to the Google
>>Apps platform, which means that most e-mail sent on the wikimedia.org
>>domain is now hosted by Google.
>Are you sure? It doesn't look like wikimedia.org's MX point
Yury Bulka wrote:
>> A few years ago, the Wikimedia Foundation switched over to the Google Apps
>> platform, which means that most e-mail sent on the wikimedia.org domain is
>> now hosted by Google.
> Are you sure? It doesn't look like wikimedia.org's MX point to
Having "Jimmy's technolibertarian ubercapitalist friends" (to use Milos'
inimitable diction) as board *advisors* rather than voting board members
and *decision-makers* directing the movement's course strikes me as a very
So, in one of the last 15th birthday celebrations around the world, we just
watched a lightning talk from New York City, where a young hacker was
demonstrating her Wiki-sonnets engine:
Here's the one it made me given the starting article [[Homer]]:
2016-01-16 23:36 GMT+01:00 Asaf Bartov :
> So, in one of the last 15th birthday celebrations around the world, we just
> watched a lightning talk from New York City, where a young hacker was
> demonstrating her Wiki-sonnets engine:
I was very
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Johan Jönsson wrote:
> > http://wikison.net/
> The status as a student union will
> be nominated for deletion still.
Also, Richard Knipel has helpfully informed me that the hacker's name is Cassie
I have proposed a new Wikimedia project on Meta. I hope you guys can take a
look and give your views.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
So how to deal with legitimate uses that require many requests?
Is it better to not serve them at all?
On Jan 16, 2016 19:50, "John" wrote:
> In cases of excessive resource usage we have several options. Contact the
> source, throttle them, or flat out disable access
You called? :)
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:42 AM, Chris Keating
> Ok, spot the idiot who can't send an offlist email offlist.
> On 13 Jan 2016 09:38, "Chris Keating" wrote:
> > That's what the Googleplex wants you to think!
> > On
It would make sense in general, but if we de-contextualize Wikimedia.
The potential of Wikimedia projects are connected with the question that
they are free. Having a premium access means two kind of risks:
a) losing the community, and Wikipedia will become quickly a "big
The video is fantastic, Anna. Great job!
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
> Great work, Anna.
> Best wishes,
> from Bengali Wikipedia community
> On 16 Jan 2016 18:34, "Yury Bulka"
Mail list logo