On 8 June 2012 04:08, Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/6/7 Risker <risker...@gmail.com>: > > The first IPv6 edit to English Wikipedia required suppression, I have > been > > advised, so I think there are some valid concerns about the implications > > this change will have on vandalism management. > > > > Does nobody else see the issues associated with having what little > guidance > > there is about IPv6 locked into pages in user space on a single project, > > when this is a global change? > > > > Risker, I think you're over-reacting here. Yes, there are risks > associated with IPv6. No, they haven't been addressed completely > before IPv6 day (apparently because of the very late moment the > decision to participate was taken). But it hasn't destroyed the > projects so far and chances are, by the time IPv6 vandalism will have > any significant effect, they will be solved (estimates are that 50% of > the Internet users will have IPv6 only in 6 years [1]). > > I will compare this with the SOPA blackout (and the equivalent event > on it.wp). Back then, there were people talking about the negative > effects the blackout will have on the credibility of Wikipedia. The > blackout happened and passed without any significant drop in > pageviews, but with huge media and popular attention. > > IPv6 is now in a stage where it needs that kind of attention. There > are only 3 countries in the world with more than 1% of IPv6 users > [2][3], and in one of them there are still troubles with the new > protocol. If there is little content available on IPv6, people will > not even be aware it exists and they will not demand it from their > ISP, which means there will be no users for IPv6 content making it > useless and the loop will continue. Someone had to break this loop and > the content providers were the easiest place this could happen. > > It is good to have people aware of the problems ahead, but just crying > wolf does not really help. > > > I have never said that moving to IPv6 is a bad idea. What I am complaining about is the dismissive attitude taken toward the volunteers that are stuck cleaning up the mess when Engineering decides to do something, apparently on the spur of the moment, without telling anyone outside their own little walled garden. It would have taken one email to the Checkuser mailing list two months ago saying "We're really serious about trying to get IPv6 up and running for June 5" and people would have been pulling together the resources and making the software changes for the various tools we use. But no, we're told we're being wimps for having the nerve to complain that we've just been steamrollered, and that advance notice and the opportunity to plan are unimportant. Bluntly put, you're not the ones cleaning up the mess, we are; our job is easier if we have time to order in the extra mops.
Earlier, Erik said: "Regarding privacy, both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses can be dangerously revealing in terms of personal identity (e.g. some ISPs even tie street address information to your IPv4 address). It's always been fundamentally problematic that MediaWiki reveals this information nakedly, and it's what enabled past large-scale investigations like WikiScanner, for good and for ill. In the mid to long term, I believe we need to investigate moving away from full disclosure of IP addresses when editing without logging in, but this is independent of IPv4/IPv6." Do this now, please. Even I can see how easy it ought to be to replace the last three digits of an IPv4 address with XXX in publicly viewable lists and logs....and reduce the publicly visible IPv6 string to its first three segments. That will suffice until a brighter idea comes to the fore. The WMF projects are the *only* major user-interactive website that takes this cavalier attitude toward what the rest of the world is increasingly viewing as personal information, and about 30% of the suppression requests coming in at English Wikipedia relate to IP addresses of users who accidentally edit logged out, or new users who didn't really understand that their IP would show when they edited. The issues I point out with the IPv6 transition are social issues. Nobody expects Engineering to go all touchy-feely. But we do expect to be treated with respect. Next time, give us a month or two of warning. And please don't insult people by pretending this was a spur of the moment decision: the more I read, the more clear it is that for months IPv6 Day was the target for bringing this online. Best, Risker _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
