Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
2012/7/24 birgitte...@yahoo.com: On Jul 24, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/7/24 birgitte...@yahoo.com: [...] So I definitely believe what it.WM wants to do, to connect people with local events, has real value. And that it has value for the individual people just as much as for it.WM. strong +1. The main question is whether the benefit from being able to connect people with local events is worth the risk of collecting more personalized of their data than we are accustomed to handling. I could be wrong but I don't think we would handle more data than what we are doing now. We are not going to use that data and as far as I know that data dies in the moment the system has output the message. Maybe this is the area that needs more study. And I am probably the wrong person to try and even formulate technical questions, but is there a way to make use of this data without storing it? Without even knowing who recieved what personalized messages, unless, of course,they choose to respond? I will forward these questions to wikitech-l. There is still the creep factor, in that readers of the messages will not necessarily know that it was all handled blindly. However it should technically preserve the reader's privacy, if no person nor computer can recall what messages any person was presented with. And if an FAQ is well-linked, anyone who under the misperception that it was handled invasively can learn how serious we are about the subject. A FAQ page would be useful, then I think we could decide that, for example: * the geonotice can be centered only on big cities (e.g. Chef-lieus) * Messages should not make use of the geolocalization information itself, but only static test (i.e. NO Hey you living in X, there a meetup in Milan - YES for There's meetup in Milan) If such a thing is even possible I suppoose it becomes a sort of philosophical question. If no one nor computer can know whether or not you recieved a personally targeted message is the targeting invasive of your privacy? yes, that's pretty much my point, I think nobody is interested to know if somebody has seen a geotarget message or not, my point is about making people from Milan (north of Italy) know that there is a local meetup without bothering people from Rome (center) or Palermo (south of Italy). (please note that with the current system we were not even able to accurately distinguish betwen macro-regions as north/center/south Italy) Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/7/24 birgitte...@yahoo.com: On Jul 24, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/7/24 birgitte...@yahoo.com: [...] So I definitely believe what it.WM wants to do, to connect people with local events, has real value. And that it has value for the individual people just as much as for it.WM. strong +1. The main question is whether the benefit from being able to connect people with local events is worth the risk of collecting more personalized of their data than we are accustomed to handling. I could be wrong but I don't think we would handle more data than what we are doing now. We are not going to use that data and as far as I know that data dies in the moment the system has output the message. Maybe this is the area that needs more study. And I am probably the wrong person to try and even formulate technical questions, but is there a way to make use of this data without storing it? Without even knowing who recieved what personalized messages, unless, of course,they choose to respond? I will forward these questions to wikitech-l. There is still the creep factor, in that readers of the messages will not necessarily know that it was all handled blindly. However it should technically preserve the reader's privacy, if no person nor computer can recall what messages any person was presented with. And if an FAQ is well-linked, anyone who under the misperception that it was handled invasively can learn how serious we are about the subject. A FAQ page would be useful, then I think we could decide that, for example: * the geonotice can be centered only on big cities (e.g. Chef-lieus) * Messages should not make use of the geolocalization information itself, but only static test (i.e. NO Hey you living in X, there a meetup in Milan - YES for There's meetup in Milan) If such a thing is even possible I suppoose it becomes a sort of philosophical question. If no one nor computer can know whether or not you recieved a personally targeted message is the targeting invasive of your privacy? yes, that's pretty much my point, I think nobody is interested to know if somebody has seen a geotarget message or not, my point is about making people from Milan (north of Italy) know that there is a local meetup without bothering people from Rome (center) or Palermo (south of Italy). (please note that with the current system we were not even able to accurately distinguish betwen macro-regions as north/center/south Italy) There also are infoboxes and categories that people use to indicate where they live. It could also be a preference, to make it private info. (and would be nice to get geonotices for home even while I am traveling, or if I use a proxy or something) Cheers, Katie Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org @wikimediadc / @wikimania2012 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
2012/7/25 aude aude.w...@gmail.com: There also are infoboxes and categories that people use to indicate where they live. I think this solutions has the same drawbacks of using an opt-in gadget. It could also be a preference, to make it private info. (and would be nice to get geonotices for home even while I am traveling, or if I use a proxy or something) I think instead this could work better than the previous because on the first access one can review its preferences. I also think there should be an optiont to say please do not bother me with geotargeted messages i.e. an opt-out option. Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
2012/7/24 birgitte...@yahoo.com: [...] So I definitely believe what it.WM wants to do, to connect people with local events, has real value. And that it has value for the individual people just as much as for it.WM. strong +1. The main question is whether the benefit from being able to connect people with local events is worth the risk of collecting more personalized of their data than we are accustomed to handling. I could be wrong but I don't think we would handle more data than what we are doing now. We are not going to use that data and as far as I know that data dies in the moment the system has output the message. Maybe the benefit does win out for many people in Italy (I don't really understand enough about what degree of improvement you are anticipating to have a firm opinion). But it is certainly not worth the risk for people in areas that do not notice problems with the current system. I will say that this seems fair enough for me, from what I have seen I can say that the current system is working on wide flat areas with enough internet provider servers coverage, this could vary from country to country for a number of reasons (from morphology to broadband penetration, etc.). This is why I am suggesting that the browser feature might only be limited to areas that are known to reach some pre-defined level of error under geolocation. Or else that it be made an opt-in feature (perhaps even advertised through the current geonotice in areas that are known to be a problem). However I don't believe that gathering more browser data for everyone everywhere is a likely to be good overall solution. Yes, opt-in is a viable solution but I think it spoils the best from the system, in fact with opt-in we would only reach people that: * are registered users * are expert enough to know that such gadgets exist and know how to activate them (I didn't know this myself till some months ago although I'm a Wikipedia editor from 4+ years). and I expect this category of users are already participating or already know how to get informations about meet-ups and local events even if are buried in obscure pages. Anyway, I would be very glad of seeing a new study, comprehending more countries but I don't have enough time (and probably all the necessary competences) needed for it, maybe we could some professor interested on doing such a study (I think it could well be a research work for an undergraduate student or a bachelor thesis). Do you think this could work? Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com: I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate. I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request. But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here: * Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?) * Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send position information and potential benefits (more accurately localized messages) is worth? * Are you happy with the current system ? * Do you think a deeper study of the issue (i.e. a new survey, conducted on a broader sample and in a more scientifically precise way) would be useful or would help you make a more informed decision? * Have you any further proposal for the use of the system? Thank you, please also use the discussion page of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice#Open_questions_.28feedback_welcome.29 for comments. Thank you, Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com: I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate. I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request. But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here: * Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?) Yes, I think it's invasive and Wikipedians can be quite sensitive about privacy. (even if it's all in the browser, with JavaScript, etc.) It may not be the case everywhere, but the IP based geolocation is good enough for purposes of geonotices. Right now, we pretty much opt everyone into the geonotices, though each can be dismissed or people can turn them off with css / js. I think people would freak out about the more precise geolocation and more would opt out. (e.g. whatever happened with Twitter's geolocation? as far as I see, people don't use it much) * Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send position information and potential benefits (more accurately localized messages) is worth? Not worth it. Not enough benefit over the current approach. * Are you happy with the current system ? Yes. Obviously the UI for the geonotice tool can use improvement, and would be nice to see more geolocation functionality in CentralNotice. * Do you think a deeper study of the issue (i.e. a new survey, conducted on a broader sample and in a more scientifically precise way) would be useful or would help you make a more informed decision? No. Cheers, Katie * Have you any further proposal for the use of the system? Thank you, please also use the discussion page of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice#Open_questions_.28feedback_welcome.29 for comments. Thank you, Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org @wikimediadc / @wikimania2012 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
birgitte...@yahoo.com, 23/07/2012 14:28: I am unaware of what the shortcomings of the current system are and where any improvements would be felt. This makes it a bit hard to have a firm opinion of the trade-offs involved with changing the system. So what exactly are the problems people are having with the current geolocation system? As the page tries to prove, looks like the current system is completely unreliable and therefore useless for most geonotices in Italy and probably other places. Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
On Jul 23, 2012 2:59 PM, Deryck Chan deryckc...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 23, 2012 11:48 AM, aude aude.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com: I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate. I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request. But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here: * Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?) Yes, I think it's invasive and Wikipedians can be quite sensitive about privacy. (even if it's all in the browser, with JavaScript, etc.) It may not be the case everywhere, but the IP based geolocation is good enough for purposes of geonotices. Doesn't work well enough in the UK for our purposes - there are threads and threads of debate on wikimediauk-l if you want to delve into that. The US is the exception, not the rule, in that lat-lon geolocation actually works to a useful accuracy. Deryck Right now, we pretty much opt everyone into the geonotices, though each can be dismissed or people can turn them off with css / js. I think people would freak out about the more precise geolocation and more would opt out. (e.g. whatever happened with Twitter's geolocation? as far as I see, people don't use it much) * Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send position information and potential benefits (more accurately localized messages) is worth? Not worth it. Not enough benefit over the current approach. * Are you happy with the current system ? Yes. Obviously the UI for the geonotice tool can use improvement, and would be nice to see more geolocation functionality in CentralNotice. * Do you think a deeper study of the issue (i.e. a new survey, conducted on a broader sample and in a more scientifically precise way) would be useful or would help you make a more informed decision? No. Cheers, Katie * Have you any further proposal for the use of the system? Thank you, please also use the discussion page of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice#Open_questions_.28feedback_welcome.29 for comments. Thank you, Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org @wikimediadc / @wikimania2012 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
birgitte...@yahoo.com, 23/07/2012 19:27: On Jul 23, 2012, at 7:42 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: birgitte...@yahoo.com, 23/07/2012 14:28: I am unaware of what the shortcomings of the current system are and where any improvements would be felt. This makes it a bit hard to have a firm opinion of the trade-offs involved with changing the system. So what exactly are the problems people are having with the current geolocation system? As the page tries to prove, looks like the current system is completely unreliable and therefore useless for most geonotices in Italy and probably other places. I think it would be useful to have a wider study of the accuracy of the current system. Privacy issues are always a concern. I am not certain I could support gathering more exact information on users who are well-served by the current system. It would be more supportable, I think, if there were a way to turn on the browser-based system only for those who are in areas that are known to be poorly served by the current system. Or if you were to ask those who geolocate to known ambiguous areas to opt-in to browser-based geolocation. There is obviously a benefit for some people, but a cost to everyone if we were to switch wholesale. Further study to determine exactly how widespread and how significant the benefit would be is something that I think might be useful. What if the new system happened e.g. to be needed for geonotices (to distinguish regions within a country) but not fundraising (which so far cares only about country, for currency/language/payment/legal purposes)? Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
A location gadget would be a way to start. With a gadget, it is opt-in. On Jul 23, 2012 7:43 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: birgitte...@yahoo.com, 23/07/2012 14:28: I am unaware of what the shortcomings of the current system are and where any improvements would be felt. This makes it a bit hard to have a firm opinion of the trade-offs involved with changing the system. So what exactly are the problems people are having with the current geolocation system? As the page tries to prove, looks like the current system is completely unreliable and therefore useless for most geonotices in Italy and probably other places. Nemo __**_ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Geolocalization improvement proposal
Hi all, I have written a proposal for the improvement of the current geolocalization system used for the geonotice, being the current one really poor and of no use in some areas. This proposal is based on the use of the geolocalization capabilities of modern browsers. Having a more accurate geolocalization system would benefit both readers, which will be reading only messages interesting for people in their areas, and the projects by fostering direct participation in local events. You can find the proposal here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate. Thanks for your attention, Cristian ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
