Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocking of HTTPS connection by China

This response seems to miss the fact that, in this particular case, censorship is being accomplished through eavesdropping. On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Matthew Roth wrote: > Hi all, > I wanted to share a clarifying email from Ryan Lane in WMF Ops. He's > working through the challenges of HT

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocking of HTTPS connection by China

What is this "hard-enabled" and "soft-enabled"? If the Chinese volunteer editor community requests that HTTPS be "soft-enabled" for them, and you do so, does that solve anything? On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Matthew Roth wrote: > We've also hard-enabled HTTPS on all of our > private wikis a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocking of HTTPS connection by China

On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Brad Jorsch wrote: > "Hard-enabled", on the other hand, means that anyone fetching the http > URL would be redirected to the corresponding https URL.[2] If this > were somehow done now, then people in China would not be able to read > Wikipedia at all because the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

There is plenty of reason to think the government would be interested in Wikipedia access logs. On the other hand, there's very little reason to believe an organization when they say they haven't been turning over information under a top secret order which they're not allowed to tell anyone about.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Benoit Landry wrote: > What "information" could the WMF disclose that isn't already available to > some volunteers anyhow? I don't know what information "some volunteers" have access to, who qualifies as "some volunteers" (does the board qualify?), or why it matt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Craig Franklin wrote: > I wouldn't say that there's nothing to worry about, but at the same time I > doubt we're near the top of the spooks' priority list. > Maybe not priority-wise, but remember that the cooperation between Mediawiki developers and the CIA goes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > Everything passing over the internet is archived. Nearly everything done > at Wikipedia passes over the internet. > Encrypted, if you're using https everywhere (and Wikipedia hasn't intentionally or unintentionally compromised their certifica

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > Correct. If Osama Bin Laden had been editing Wikipedia, before his death > of course, through some account in Pakistan, it would have been rather > reasonable to respond favorable to a request for information. But "plenty > of reason to think

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Theo10011 wrote: > I'm not sure how that would have any > bearing on Wikipedia though, the purpose there is to write an article, fix > typos, add pictures, occasionally there is cross-communication between > different editors. Wikipedia is not a top traffic webs

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

> >> Encrypted, if you're using https everywhere (and Wikipedia hasn't > > intentionally or unintentionally compromised their certificate). > >> > > > > But simple encryption that NSA can break at will. > > No one will bother trying to break SSL/TLS. The NSA certainly doesn't > need to. They can ju

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Theo10011 wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Anthony wrote: > > We know that people's Google searches have been used against them in > > court. I'm not aware of any cases where Wikipedia searches have been > > used. But I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > You are right, Anthony, never assume you're not dealing with idiots. If > NSA is doing doing detailed surveillance of Tea Party activists or > defense lawyers we are truly well along the road to hell. > Maybe we are. It c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Luis Villa wrote: > We should have a blog post up within the next few days to discuss > PRISM and our values in more detail; we will pass that along here when > it is posted. Thanks. I do appreciate this. And it seems to be better worded than the statements of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:13 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > e.g. "we have never received or honored an NSA or FISA subpoena or > order" is good (and far better than I've seen from Google or > Facebook), but ... > > does that exclude all possible orders under the Patriot Act? > does that exclude ord

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:06 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > Anthony wrote: > >One thing I'd also appreciate is that if indeed Wikipedia access logs are > >not even collected in the first place (except for 1/1000 samples), that > >this be stated officially, rather than relying

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Mathieu Stumpf < psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote: > Le 2013-06-10 16:01, John Vandenberg a écrit : > > It would be good *if* the WMF can provide assurances to editors that >> they havent received any national security letters or other 'trawling' >> requests f

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > There will always be humans maintaining the system who must, in order to > do their work, have potential access to everything. No, there isn't. This statement is about as recklessly false as your previous one that WMF didn't have the logs.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 06/11/2013 08:19 AM, Anthony wrote: > > Putting everything in a single database which can be accessed by a single > > developer is a choice. > > It is, also, the only *reasonable* choice given the resour

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > PRISM > > From @ShammaBoyarin on Twitter: "Its not as if the NSA were mass > downloading articles from JSTOR." Certainly if the evidence showed that the NSA were breaking into wiring closets and hacking into computer networks this would be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > > (Yes, you can speculate that they're probably doing this too, but this > > particular scandal is the NSA getting information from computer networks > > with the permission of the computer owners, not despite the owners > > actively > > tryin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: > > The fact of the matter is that there would be a much bigger uproar if the > > NSA were caught doing what Aaron Swartz did, on American soil against an > > innocent American company. If NSA were caught breaking into wiring > > closets > > an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Ryan Lane wrote: > I would be fired and jailed before I knowingly let that occur. If this was > the case I'd very surely not be working for Wikimedia Foundation. > Key word there being "knowingly". ___ Wikimedia-l maili

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:44 AM, Tim Starling wrote: > On 01/08/13 14:15, Anthony wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Ryan Lane wrote: > > > >> I would be fired and jailed before I knowingly let that occur. If this > was > >> the case I'd

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM, James Salsman wrote: > George William Herbert wrote: > >... > > It would also not be much more effort or customer impact > > to pad to the next larger 1k size for a random large fraction > > of transmissions. > > Padding each transmission with a random number of by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

How much padding is already inherent in HTTPS? Does the protocol pad to the size of the blocks in the block cipher? Seems to me that any amount of padding is going to give little bang for the buck, at least without using some sort of pipelining. You could probably do quite a bit if you redesigne

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

> Anthony wrote: > > > > How much padding is already inherent in HTTPS? > > None, which is why Ryan's Google Maps fingerprinting example works. > Citation needed. > >... Seems to me that any amount of padding is going to give little > > bang for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Anthony wrote: > > Anthony wrote: >> > >> > How much padding is already inherent in HTTPS? >> >> None, which is why Ryan's Google Maps fingerprinting example works. >> > > Citation needed.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

Google also seems to be using RC4 128, so that explains why there's no padding by default there. RC4 is a stream cipher. The more secure ciphers are (all?) block ciphers. "A block cipher works on units of a fixed size

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM, James Salsman wrote: > Anthony, padding in this context means adding null or random bytes to the > end of encrypted TCP streams in order to obscure their true length. The > process of adding padding is entirely independent of the choice of > under

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Anthony wrote: > AES and CBC, which would be a block cipher which pads to 128 or 256 bytes. > I mean bits, of course. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Ryan Lane wrote: > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Anthony wrote: > > It seems that the ciphers which run in CBC mode, at least, are padded. > > Wikipedia currently seems to be set to use RC4 128. I'm not sure what, > if > > any, p

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM, John wrote: > that two week estimate was given worst case scenario. Given the best case > we are talking as little as a few hours for the smaller wikis to 5 days or > so for a project the size of enwiki. (see > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/xmldatadumps-l/2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:18 AM, John wrote: > take a look at http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Importing_XML_dumps for > exactly how to import an existing dump, I know the process of re-importing > a cluster for the toolserver is normally just a few days when they have the > needed dumps. To

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:30 AM, John wrote: > Ill run a quick benchmark and import the full history of simple.wikipedia to > my laptop wiki on a stick, and give an exact duration Simple.wikipedia is nothing like en.wikipedia. For one thing, there's no need to turn on $wgCompressRevisions with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:45 AM, John wrote: > Simple.wikipedia is nothing like en.wikipedia I care to dispute that > statement, All WMF wikis are setup basically the same (an odd extension here > or there is different, and different namespace names at times) but for the > purpose of recovery sim

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:22 AM, John wrote: > Anthony the process is linear, you have a php inserting X number of rows per > Y time frame. Amazing. I need to switch all my databases to MySQL. It can insert X rows per Y time frame, regardless of whether the database is 20 gigabytes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:06 AM, John wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Anthony wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:22 AM, John wrote: >> > Anthony the process is linear, you have a php inserting X number of rows >> > per >> > Y time frame. >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:27 AM, J Alexandr Ledbury-Romanov wrote: > I'd like to point out that the increasingly technical nature of this > conversation probably belongs either on wikitech-l, or off-list, and that > the strident nature of the comments is fast approaching inappropriate. Really? I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

data set which is a snapshot of the English Wikipedia. We can coordinate any questions, and any implementation details, on a separate list. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:27 AM, J Alexandr Ledbury-Romanov > wrote: >> I'd like

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fire Drill Re: Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 17 May 2012 12:43, Anthony wrote: >> In fact, I think someone at WMF should contact Amazon and see if >> they'll let us conduct the experiment for free, in exchange for us >> creating the dump for them to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:22 AM, emijrp wrote: > They are XML dumps. Why did you say they are semi-useless? Because they are XML dumps, mainly. The data in the WMF database is compressed in a format which can be easily randomly accessed. The dump procedure is to uncompress it, convert it to XML

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > We could also consider the possibility of allowing users to use OpenID or > OAuth or whatever the web identity mechanism du jour is to allow loose > affiliation of usernames between MediaWiki installs. That way you can > establish the link be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia sites not easy to archive (Was Re: Knol is closing tomorrow )

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 17 May 2012 13:32, Anthony wrote: >> Because they are XML dumps, mainly.  The data in the WMF database is >> compressed in a format which can be easily randomly accessed. > > It's a dump. Not really. Y

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not. Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM. On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:28 AM, David Gerard wrote: > TomTom press release: > http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsle

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:27 AM, David Gerard wrote: > On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wrote: > >> The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas >> OSM, for the most part, is not. >> Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not becau

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Richard Symonds wrote: > Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete? Sure, but they all require comparison to something (a data source, memory, the real world) which is accurate/complete. ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Strainu wrote: > 2012/5/29 Anthony : >> The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas >> OSM, for the most part, is not. > > I see it the other way around: OSM, for the most part, IS usable in > the real world. One c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Anthony wrote: >  I then tried navfree usa. Looking more closely at the directions it did give me, it is having me get off the toll highway at basically every exit and then getting back on it. And the destination is off by 13 blocks (about a m

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Strainu wrote: > 2012/5/29 Anthony : >> I just tried osmand.  I can't even figure out how to put in an >> address.  I then tried navfree usa. > > You're limiting yourself to Android, which isn't very fair. Try to get > hold o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Strainu wrote: > 2012/5/29 Anthony : >> I'm not doubting that someone can take OSM data and make it into >> something usable.  I'm not even doubting that someone *has* taken OSM >> data and made it into something usable. > > Y

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > On 29 May 2012 15:28, Anthony wrote: >> And I don't foresee OSM ever being able to catch up.  Google is very >> much a moving target.  While OSM is working on catching up on >> geolocation (address to lat/l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM, John Du Hart wrote: > What personal information do you think is contained in an IPv6 address? Don't they sometimes contain MAC address information? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: > * IPv6 adoption is still below 1% globally [1]. > * It's likely that we'll encounter network-level issues well before we > hit application-level issues during limited production testing. > * In the event that we manage to resolve all issues, it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Anthony wrote: > My own prediction is that, within a short period of time, 99.% of > edits done through IPv6 will be abuse.  I'd say immediately, but 5 > days may be a bit too short for hoards of people to figure out how to > chain an IPv6 pro

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 2 June 2012 13:44, Anthony wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM, John Du Hart wrote: >>> What personal information do you think is contained in an IPv6 address? >> >> Don't they sometimes contain M

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Leslie Carr wrote: > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Anthony wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Thomas Dalton >> wrote: >>> On 2 June 2012 13:44, Anthony wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM, John Du Hart wrote

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Larry Sanger rides again

> Does anyone know does he have some new project which needs promotion > in media? http://www.prlog.org/11887092-announcing-new-wikipedia-criticism-site.html ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > The more you play with OpenStreetMap, the more magical ways you start > discovering that you can use the data. Two that I've recently found... > > 1. Water fountains. Here in London, we used to have lots of water > fountains. Then modern capital

Re: [Wikimedia-l] speedydeletion.wika.com lauched

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Tarc Meridian wrote: > > This  has been tried before, i.e. wikialpha.org.  Pages are speedily deleted > for a reason, many of them quite properly so.  Moving potentially libelous > BLP attack pages and other sundry junk to a publicly viewable wiki is not a > ver

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Kim Bruning wrote: > I noticed that my current IPv6 address appears to be assigned > dynamically by XS4ALL. I can probably get static if I choose it. But the > dynamic assignment option does alleviate some people's privacy > concerns, right? One particular concern

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Pro-active user privacy (Was: Update on IPv6)

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:22 PM, James Forrester wrote: > There are lots of things we could do - for instance, blocking all > edits except by logged-in editors would solve this (but is profoundly > against our general operating principles) It's really not, considering how incredibly easy it is to

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [cc-community] CC 4.0 and the GNU GPL

Forwarding this from the CC-licenses list. The WMF should explore what impact, if any, one-way CC-BY-SA to GPL compatibility would have on WMF projects. Is anyone at the WMF talking to CC/FSF about this? -- Forwarded message -- From: Christopher Allan Webber Date: Thu, May 31, 2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > On Friday, 15 June 2012 at 13:21, David Gerard wrote: >> I don't recall seeing any, but did anyone actually explain why the >> market had not provided a filtering solution for Wikipedia, if there's >> actually a demand for one? > > Market failur

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

> I have never seen a "censorware" that works > flawlessly (not even china can do this right). Either it allows to much > (incomplete blacklist) or it is unnecessary limited (incomplete whitelist > producing angry mob). Additionally it has to suite the view of the parents > and match the age of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 17.06.2012 01:21, schrieb Anthony: > >>> I have never seen a "censorware" that works >>> flawlessly (not even china can do this right). Either it allows to much >>> (incomplete blacklis

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Anthony, 17/06/2012 05:05: > >> I still would have been confused.  Still am, actually.  Did this >> paragraph have a serious point at all?  I hope so, because Wikipedia's >> porn problem is a serious issu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Not that hard to > understand, hence please avoid off-topic (see subject) paternalism. I still don't understand how calling something "perfect" when you are making an argument that it is the proper solution to a problem, is sarcasm/ir

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:14 AM, David Gerard wrote: > On 17 June 2012 13:21, Anthony wrote: > >> No software is perfect.  No solution is perfect.  But don't let the >> perfect be the enemy of the good. > > You're assuming that a "good" exists for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:14 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> On 17 June 2012 13:21, Anthony wrote: >> >>> No software is perfect.  No solution is perfect.  But don't let the >>> perfect be the enemy of the go

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:48 AM, David Gerard wrote: > So I think my question - if this is so obviously the > right thing, then where are the existing attempts? - still stands as > relevant. The fact that it is the right thing isn't obvious, and forking of free content is generally a last resort

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > It didn't even need to be complete fork. A whitelist copy would most likely > already be sufficient for your needs. It would automatically update any > article on a white list after a quick review (like sighted revision) or even > entirely

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 18.06.2012 00:40, schrieb Anthony: >> Is there even a way to export an article, >> including (recursively) all the templates it depends on? > > Every stupid bot could do this. There is no "running out of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:21 AM, David Gerard wrote: > On 18 June 2012 08:00, Tom Morris wrote: > >> {{sofixit}} >> If all the people in favour of filters had spent their time building them >> rather than arguing about them, we would have had a wide array of different >> solutions, without any

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

>> This leads me to the simple conclusion that it isn't worth the effort, >> especially if the filter is advertised to make Wikipedia a save place for >> children, while everyone (including children) can disable it at any time. > > "Think of the children" is not really an argument I ascribe to. And

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 18.06.2012 14:49, schrieb Anthony: >> Have you ever tried to do this?  It's not as easy as you are making it >> sound, at least it wasn't as of a few years ago, because Mediawiki is >> tightly coupled to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 18.06.2012 14:49, schrieb Anthony: >> And considering the heavy use of templates which are >> Wikipedia-specific, presumably you're going to allow for *some* >> hand-editing. > > That would be something e

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 19.06.2012 01:39, schrieb Anthony: > >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Tobias Oelgarte >>  wrote: >>> >>> Am 18.06.2012 14:49, schrieb Anthony: >>>> >>>> Have you e

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > My middle one can very > briefly go online alone to a few sites I've already agreed to, and I > check up on her a lot. Is Wikipedia one of those few sites? > But the whole point is, that's -my- job, not anyone else's, just like > it's my job t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Todd Allen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Anthony wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Todd Allen wrote: >>> My middle one can very >>> briefly go online alone to a few sites I've already agreed to, and I >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > {{sofixit}}, just like any area with NPOV/undue weight issues. "The next day someone will fix it back." - Douglas Hofstadter > Good for him. Care to summarize his argument? I don't particularly > care to watch his video, or for him in general

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Todd Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Anthony wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Todd Allen wrote: >>> {{sofixit}}, just like any area with NPOV/undue weight issues. >> >> "The next day someone will

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Anthony wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Todd Allen wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Anthony wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Todd Allen

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Anthony wrote: >> Heh.  Sorry, I have to laugh any time I hear a...person heavily versed >> in Wikipedia-speak...use the word consensus. > > That's the way the project works. You or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Anthony wrote: > Many images on Wikipedia have been taken without the subject's genuine > consent.  So surely that isn't the issue. In case you need an example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leon

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Anthony wrote: > >> Many images on Wikipedia have been taken without the subject's genuine >> consent.  So surely that isn't the issue. > > Many are transferred to Commons

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Anthony wrote: > Secondly, I'm not talking just about sexually explicit photos. > Wikipedia has photos of people being or about to be [[behead]]ed, > [[torture]]d, [[kidnap]]ped, [[assassination]]ed, etc.  I checked, and > there's no photo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > Well, Todd has certainly said on-wiki in the past that he would not see a > problem in Wikipedia using a video of rape to illustrate an article on the > topic, provided it were appropriately licensed and did not raise privacy > concerns (for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Can you point me to any examples of real "child abuse", "sexual abuse" or of > "child sexual abuse"? On Wikipedia? On Commons? Anywhere? For "child sexual abuse", I was referring mainly to the Virgin Killer image (and as I said, whether

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > But in practice, we do have photos of > victims at articles such as [[Rape of Nanking]] and [[Holocaust]]. > Some of those photos are extremely disturbing. That's because the > articles are about extremely disturbing subjects. So legal + no "co

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 21.06.2012 22:51, schrieb Anthony: > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Tobias Oelgarte >>  wrote: >>> >>> Can you point me to any examples of real "child abuse", "sexual abuse"

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > I see a child, but i don't see sexual abuse. So i can't agree with you that > it is an instance for child sexual abuse. As I said, it is disputed. > I should have written this question: Can you point me to examples of any of > the previou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with "Rape" in title under advertising pressure.

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Kim Bruning wrote: > The SOPA strike was necessary for us to retain neutrality. Figuratively speaking, or do you think it actually made a whit of difference? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with "Rape" in title under advertising pressure.

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 27/06/2012 12:10 AM, Anthony wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Kim Bruning >>  wrote: >>> >>> The SOPA strike was necessary for us to retain neutrality. >> >> Figurativel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:02 AM, David Gerard wrote: > On 10 July 2012 09:22, Thomas Morton wrote: >> On 9 July 2012 20:41, Milos Rancic wrote: > >>> In less than half an hour Russian Wikipedia will go on one-day strike >>> against SOPA/PIPA-like law in Russia [1] (in Russian). > >> Unless I am

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SOPA, threat or menace (was Russian Wikipedia goes on strike)

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > But the whole post gave me an impression of a good lawyer attempting > to reconcile the imperative of being a zealous advocate for the > interests of a client, while still remaining intellectually honest. Well, it also has to be read keep

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > The law just passed the third reading without any changes. It has to be now > signed by the president and will be enforced in the present form on November > 1, 2012. So is this going to shut down Russian Wikipedia? I still don't see

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SOPA, threat or menace (was Russian Wikipedia goes on strike)

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > Semi-digression - I'd take the above argument more seriously if dedicated > Wikipedia editors didn't keep making "BADSITES" proposals. It's also interesting to watch the overlap of PIPA-opponents, and Citizens United opponents. Without C

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > Anthony writes: > > "I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the > proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain > traction in Congress." > > I'm not speaking for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SOPA, threat or menace (was Russian Wikipedia goes on strike)

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Seth Finkelstein wrote: >> Anthony wrote: >> Well, it also has to be read keeping in mind that it would be >> borderline malpractice for him to have stated "if SOPA passes then >> Wikipedia will be in violation of the law and forced to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Anthony wrote: > >>> I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here. >> >> The connection is free speech. > > Analytically, however, the issue raised

  1   2   3   4   >