I think now that we are suing the NSA that it's deeply hypocritical to be surveilling users. A quick fix: stuff the ip field with random numbers.
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 8:38 AM, James Alexander <jalexan...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > The idea of the IP being more private in the history/ public logs (for > example a unique hash so that you know it's "an IP" but not where/what IP" > ) is one that I know has been discussed and is desired by a good number > within the foundation including within legal. I'll try to look for the > phabricator task about it tomorrow. I think that's something that is likely > to happen, it isn't easy though and requires a fair number of resources to > be pointed at it to get it done so it's a question of priorities and > convincing those who decide those things that it should be higher. I > believe it's something, privacy wise, that legal would really like. > > I think it is unlikely in the short to medium term, however, to get rid of > the IPs in the backend (in server logs and in the checkuser system for > example) because the replacements just aren't there. I've spent a good > amount of time thinking of a way to make the checkuser system as usable as > necessary without revealing IPs for example (including a consultant who > looked a lot but didn't really come up with anything we didn't know > already). I think it's doable, but it would be a very difficult and long > design process and I think it's unlikely in the near future. > > James Alexander > Community Advocacy > Wikimedia Foundation > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Kyanos <someanon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I don't believe a different license is needed. CC licenses can be used > for > > anonymous works: The author is not given and does not have to be > credited, > > but everything else (attribution of the work and share-alike) would stay > > the same. So a change in the terms of use to the effect of, "Unregistered > > edits are considered to have no named author," would be sufficient. > > > > Kyanos > > > > On 03/27/2015 06:41 AM, WereSpielChequers wrote: > > > >> Perhaps we should move to a different licensing model for future IP > >> edits. CC0 for IP edits would be a more sensible license for edits by > an IP > >> where in many cases no-one could attribute the edit to the individual > who > >> made it. If people don't want to release their edits as CC0 they can > always > >> create an account. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Jonathan Cardy > >> > >> > >> On 27 Mar 2015, at 10:28, Elias Friedman <elipo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> It's actually required so as to provide attribution as per the Creative > >>> Commons and other licenses we operate under. > >>> > >>> Sent from my Droid 4 > >>> Elias Friedman A.S., CCEMT-P > >>> אליהו מתתיהו בן צבי > >>> elipo...@gmail.com > >>> "יְהִי אוֹר" > >>> > >>> > > _______________________________________________ > > WikiEN-l mailing list > > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l