Mailing List Archive

Hi!

> and I am offering turn key systems with automated site mirroring
> software, image sync tools, and machine
> translators for Wikipedia. The knowledge is free, the software is
> free,
> however, hardware
> costs money ....

I'm not sure if running that hardware to support wikipedia is best
way to do it ;-)
I'd better support WMF to run the site! ;-)

--
Domas Mituzas -- http://dammit.lt/ -- [[user:midom]]


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

"Single or Dual Xeon or AMD64 based system with up to 6.0 Terabytes of
storage and 12 GB of DDR memory. Comes fully installed with the Wikipedia
Encyclopedia and a full suite of automated site mirroring and update tools
and 1 year of service and support."

Fantastic. Wikipedia Weekly News couldn't have put it better. Jeff,
congratulations on getting Wolf Mountain ready in time for the national
holiday*.

SJ

* http://www.theonion.com/content/node/50902

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Domas Mituzas wrote:

>Hi!
>
>
>
>> and I am offering turn key systems with automated site mirroring
>>software, image sync tools, and machine
>>translators for Wikipedia. The knowledge is free, the software is
>>free,
>>however, hardware
>>costs money ....
>>
>>
>
>I'm not sure if running that hardware to support wikipedia is best
>way to do it ;-)
>I'd better support WMF to run the site! ;-)
>
>
>
Disagree. I've talked to a lot of organizatons and groups who love WMF
content but want to filter
it for in-house use similiar to CleanFlix. Most educational facilities
and religious groups who really love wikipedia want
a "clean" version of the content, with most of the sexual
revolution/pro-alternate lifestyle propoganda materials
removed from the dumps. WMF does a great job allowing all points of view
and all knowledge in the dumps -- I
respect this -- unfortunately, a lot of conservative groups who like WMF
content don't want the information overload
from much of the topics, or perceived erotic imagery in many of the
articles. My tools let you filter import XML dumps
for certain classes of content -- so there's a "clean" version of the
content. I doubt the LDS church wants to host WMF
materials with articles on beastialiy, same sex marriage, etc. It's a
matter of degrees. Making WP more pervasive also means
accomodating folks who have differing views and values. We offer a
family oriented version that's customizable as well
as Native American translation support.

The tribes hosting translations will consume a large number of these
units along with conservative religious groups and
family oriented groups. I have included a "donate now" button pointing
back to WMF in the main pages.

Jeff


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi!!!!

> revolution/pro-alternate lifestyle propoganda materials
> removed from the dumps.

You forgot China and their needs!

Anyway, I'm somewhat confused. You disagree with idea that foundation is
more worthy cause to support Wikipedia, than buying filtering hardware.

> from much of the topics, or perceived erotic imagery in many of the
> articles. My tools let you filter import XML dumps

Do your filters try to count how much pink is in picture? :)

Anyway, I'm not sure censoring Wikipedia is helping Wikipedia.
And I'm not sure anyone limiting access to proper wikipedia content is
helping Wikipedia either.

I guess there're more books which contain violence (say... smiting in
Bible), which should be definitely filtered.

Domas

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Domas Mituzas wrote:

>Hi!!!!
>
>
>
>>revolution/pro-alternate lifestyle propoganda materials
>>removed from the dumps.
>>
>>
>
>You forgot China and their needs!
>
>
Good point. I don;t know where to start on that one, so some suggestions
would be welcome.
Perhaps I should post the filtering code somwhere and let folks who know
better than I
on the china issue create a categories template for filtering China content.

>Anyway, I'm somewhat confused. You disagree with idea that foundation is
>more worthy cause to support Wikipedia, than buying filtering hardware.
>
>

>
>
>>from much of the topics, or perceived erotic imagery in many of the
>>articles. My tools let you filter import XML dumps
>>
>>
>
>Do your filters try to count how much pink is in picture? :)
>
>
They use an algorithm developed at U of U that detects pixel ratios of human
skin tone (the ratios are the same no matter what complexion) and tags them
for removal. From what I have seen its only a handful of images (@ 100) in
most of the dumps, and medial articles like "penis" and "vagina" I think
are
ok. Certain art images are objectionable to folks, along with articles
on words
like F__K, etc. which needs cleaning up.

>Anyway, I'm not sure censoring Wikipedia is helping Wikipedia.
>And I'm not sure anyone limiting access to proper wikipedia content is
>helping Wikipedia either.
>
>
Well, that's also my view as well, I hate censorship, but like it or
not, the conservative
element of the US comprises 98% of the folks who run these organizations
and have
real $$$ to support Wikimedia, and the criticisms I get when I talk to
folks about supporting Wikipedia are:

1). It's in the press due to inaccurate bios
2). It hosts radical left wing content
3). It is used as a lobbying platform by various political groups

Saying we support "filtering" and a "clean" version, whether its really
clean or not, shuts these people
up and at a minimum provides some level of comfort they can use the
content and have a degree of control
over certain categories of content use.

Were it up to me, I would say "let them eat Wikipedia as is", but its
not up to me, and I have to deploy
Native Translations in areas like the Cherokee Nation which is 99% hard
core Southern Baptist, and
other areas which do not have such an open view.

Jeff

>I guess there're more books which contain violence (say... smiting in
>Bible), which should be definitely filtered.
>
>Domas
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> They use an algorithm developed at U of U that detects pixel ratios of human
> skin tone (the ratios are the same no matter what complexion) and tags them
> for removal.

I doubt that would work too well on say:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiff

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Single or Dual Xeon or AMD64 based system with up to 6.0 Terabytes of
> storage and 12 GB of DDR memory. Comes fully installed with the Wikipedia
> Encyclopedia and a full suite of automated site mirroring and update tools
> and 1 year of service and support."

Why so much storage?

Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
(in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).

I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?

:)
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

So that we may never have to buy another server for decades... or until we
need more processing power.

On 7/26/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/26/06, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > "Single or Dual Xeon or AMD64 based system with up to 6.0 Terabytes of
> > storage and 12 GB of DDR memory. Comes fully installed with the
> Wikipedia
> > Encyclopedia and a full suite of automated site mirroring and update
> tools
> > and 1 year of service and support."
>
> Why so much storage?
>
> Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
> 300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
> takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
> (in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).
>
> I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?
>
> :)
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, James Hare <messedrocker@gmail.com> wrote:
> So that we may never have to buy another server for decades... or until we
> need more processing power.

I wish you luck in keeping the disks running that long. ;)
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I wouldn't know -- I think the longest I kept a computer was 3 years before
I got a new one. I'm highly impatient with old computers.

On 7/26/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/26/06, James Hare <messedrocker@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So that we may never have to buy another server for decades... or until
> we
> > need more processing power.
>
> I wish you luck in keeping the disks running that long. ;)
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why so much storage?
>
> Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
> 300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
> takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
> (in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).
>
> I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?
>
> :)

If you are doing mass computerised translations you could burn through
it pretty fast.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

>On 7/26/06, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"Single or Dual Xeon or AMD64 based system with up to 6.0 Terabytes of
>>storage and 12 GB of DDR memory. Comes fully installed with the Wikipedia
>>Encyclopedia and a full suite of automated site mirroring and update tools
>>and 1 year of service and support."
>>
>>
>
>Why so much storage?
>
>Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
>300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
>takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
>(in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).
>
>I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?
>
>

With all revision pages its around 3 TB total. Room for growth and
mirroring
of 5 + 1 or 0 + 1 configurations. Using RAID 1 + 5 Mirrored RAID 5
arrays really boosts
read performance about 60%, so the extra storage are for these fault
tolerant and
performance options.

Jeff

>:)
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

>On 7/26/06, James Hare <messedrocker@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>So that we may never have to buy another server for decades... or until we
>>need more processing power.
>>
>>
>
>I wish you luck in keeping the disks running that long. ;)
>
>

3 x 1 power supplys and high output fans. These are the same units I
sell through Solera Networks (I am
using the same manufacture I contracted with for Solera),
They are installed with Wikipedia instead of solera networks software
(forensics tracking software is optional),
and these units seem to go for about 4 years before needing hard drive
swapouts in only 2 % of cases.
The massive airflow keeps the drives cool and they seem to go over 48
months before I start to see any sector failure issues
even in the most severe writing cases (which DSFS the file system I
wrote for Solera is extremely write intensive).

Jeff

>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni wrote:

>On 7/26/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Why so much storage?
>>
>>Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
>>300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
>>takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
>>(in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).
>>
>>I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?
>>
>>:)
>>
>>
>
>If you are doing mass computerised translations you could burn through
>it pretty fast.
>
>
>
I have to host three instances of Wikipedia, so my storage for
WikiGadugi is at 2 TB at present. I use the a shared images
setup just like the Commons, and an automated syncrhonizer that checks
for new images in a non-obstrusive way.

Wikimedia may want to consider setting up a subscription service through
cogento for folks using these appliances to
increase their revenues by offering a private mirror link for images and
content. Folks could buy appliances then purchase
a subscription to Wikimedia's images and commons setup via rsync or http
in a similair setup to Red Hat's setup for
support. Would allow a lot of MediaWiki appliances to move and also
provide Wikimedia additional sources of revenue
with little to no investment on their end.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:

>geni wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 7/26/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Why so much storage?
>>>
>>>Uncompressed enwiki text is 680GB. All images in total are about
>>>300GB. Loaded into postgresql with a normal set of indexes enwiki
>>>takes about 400GB, I can imagine that a mysql load would be any larger
>>>(in mysql mediawiki uses zlib batch compression).
>>>
>>>I guess the 3TB makes sense to have some growth room.. but 18TB?
>>>
>>>:)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>If you are doing mass computerised translations you could burn through
>>it pretty fast.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>I have to host three instances of Wikipedia, so my storage for
>WikiGadugi is at 2 TB at present. I use the a shared images
>setup just like the Commons, and an automated syncrhonizer that checks
>for new images in a non-obstrusive way.
>
>Wikimedia may want to consider setting up a subscription service through
>cogento for folks using these appliances to
>increase their revenues by offering a private mirror link for images and
>content. Folks could buy appliances then purchase
>a subscription to Wikimedia's images and commons setup via rsync or http
>in a similair setup to Red Hat's setup for
>support. Would allow a lot of MediaWiki appliances to move and also
>provide Wikimedia additional sources of revenue
>with little to no investment on their end.
>
>Jeff
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
And one more thing. If we are truly going to challenge google and yahoo
at some point for internet search engine
supremecy, this is the path to go. Google got there by seeding the
internet with appliances which skulk and harvest
content from the web with massive storage. I am currently adding search
engine capabilities combined with
automated translation and wiki formatting so we can construct a search
engine over time. It will take us about two
years to get where google is, but I have more powerful technology than
they use, so over time, I think we can
eventually get there and wikify the internet. That's where this is going
long term. Native Language preservation is
a huge deal right now -- one step at a time.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> And one more thing. If we are truly going to challenge google and yahoo
> at some point for internet search engine supremecy, this is the path to go.

No real reseason to do that. In any case the Open Directory Project
has been going since 1998 (about the same length as google) and has
never really challanged for the lead position in search technology.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 7/26/06, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/26/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> > And one more thing. If we are truly going to challenge google and yahoo
> > at some point for internet search engine supremecy, this is the path to go.
>
> No real reseason to do that. In any case the Open Directory Project
> has been going since 1998 (about the same length as google) and has
> never really challanged for the lead position in search technology.

A directory isn't a search engine, so I wouldn't expect it to do so.

A wiki is also not a search engine... But what I think Jeff is
thinking about isn't so much directly competing in the search space
but instead supplanting the world wide web with the world wide wiki.

It is interesting to ponder the social implications of a massive
switch to highly participatory systems like Wiki... perhaps
delivering on some of the promises that people used to promote
'blogging'... In any case, it's interesting.. but off topic.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi!!!

> And one more thing. If we are truly going to challenge google and
> yahoo
> at some point for internet search engine
> supremecy, this is the path to go. Google got there by seeding the
> internet with appliances which skulk and harvest
> content from the web with massive storage.

I never thought the appliances they sold (and that was their
revenue..) did ever participate in their global search. Is this
another myth used, or do you really believe they used spiders they
_sold_ to harvest information for them? Why did they build their
datacenters at all?
They did market their appliances as company-wide search boxen. Stuff
we do with lucenes.

> I am currently adding search engine capabilities combined with
> automated translation and wiki formatting so we can construct a search
> engine over time.

Search engine of what? "Distributed" in search engine context doesn't
mean John in Alaska is having a cluster with Jeb in Texas. It means
that people run datacenters with lots of servers stacked there, and
sub-millisecond medium connecting all that.
Unless, of course, you are following bittorrent lead.

> It will take us about two years to get where google is, but I have
> more powerful technology than
> they use, so over time, I think we can eventually get there and
> wikify the internet.

Um. You could share your technology, for common good, sure!

> With all revision pages its around 3 TB total.

That really requires advanced tech. At Wikipedia revision pages are
compressed, and a proper compression run contracts whole dataset into
0.5T or so (or less).

>> You forgot China and their needs!
> Good point. I don;t know where to start on that one, so some
> suggestions
> would be welcome. Perhaps I should post the filtering code somwhere
> and let folks who know
> better than I on the china issue create a categories template for
> filtering China content.

irony 1 |ˈīrənē; ˈiərnē| |ˌaɪrəni| |ˌʌɪrəni|
noun ( pl. -nies)
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally
signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect :
“Don't go overboard with the gratitude,” he rejoined with heavy
irony. See note at wit .
• a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to
what one expects and is often amusing as a result : [with clause ]
the irony is that I thought he could help me.
• (also dramatic or tragic irony) a literary technique, originally
used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a
character's words or actions are clear to the audience or reader
although unknown to the character.

> Well, that's also my view as well, I hate censorship, but like it or
> not, the conservative element of the US comprises 98% of the folks
> who run these organizations
> and have real $$$ to support Wikimedia

hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē| |həˌpɑkrəsi| |hɪˌpɒkrɪsi|
noun ( pl. -sies)
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which
one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

> Greg got it ....

I did not :(

I just opened Five Pillars article, and I know that I may fail at
'code of conduct' sometimes, sorry, but, Wikipedia has neutral point
of view.
No 'please donate' buttons will make filtered forks (a.k.a. mirrors)
worth mentioning as "helping Wikipedia".
Filtered resource/mirror does not give full power to edit the free
content.
Sure, $$$ attracts business people, and we have few business people
here, but we have the pride of not taking that with strings attached.

We have pride to make free information resource ;-)

It would be an easy task to make a list of countries worth visiting
to provide wikifilter (I'm quite amused to find wikifilter.org is
still free ;-) - there're lots of things people should not know
(because it is all very very depressing (c) Colbert ;-)
But I hope foundation has more noble causes to exist.

Cheers,
Domas

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

>On 7/26/06, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 7/26/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>And one more thing. If we are truly going to challenge google and yahoo
>>>at some point for internet search engine supremecy, this is the path to go.
>>>
>>>
>>No real reseason to do that. In any case the Open Directory Project
>>has been going since 1998 (about the same length as google) and has
>>never really challanged for the lead position in search technology.
>>
>>
>
>A directory isn't a search engine, so I wouldn't expect it to do so.
>
>A wiki is also not a search engine... But what I think Jeff is
>thinking about isn't so much directly competing in the search space
>but instead supplanting the world wide web with the world wide wiki.
>
>It is interesting to ponder the social implications of a massive
>switch to highly participatory systems like Wiki... perhaps
>delivering on some of the promises that people used to promote
>'blogging'... In any case, it's interesting.. but off topic.
>
>

Greg got it ....

Jeff

>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Domas Mituzas wrote:
> Hi!!!!
>
>> revolution/pro-alternate lifestyle propoganda materials
>> removed from the dumps.
>
> You forgot China and their needs!
>
> Anyway, I'm somewhat confused. You disagree with idea that foundation is
> more worthy cause to support Wikipedia, than buying filtering hardware.
>
>> from much of the topics, or perceived erotic imagery in many of the
>> articles. My tools let you filter import XML dumps
>
> Do your filters try to count how much pink is in picture? :)
>
> Anyway, I'm not sure censoring Wikipedia is helping Wikipedia.
> And I'm not sure anyone limiting access to proper wikipedia content is
> helping Wikipedia either.
>
> I guess there're more books which contain violence (say... smiting in
> Bible), which should be definitely filtered.
>

Yes, the Bible is full of violence, sex, and lots of other "nasty
stuff"; and so is Wikipedia. Sure, you can filter them, but you're going
to end up with a lot of holes.

A better use of time/effort would be not to filter articles on their
subject area, but on their quality; if you have the time, going through
an article to find which is the "best" revision and then letting
everyone else know, and/or making a list of what the "best" articles
are, will ultimately be more productive than filtering out a (hopefully
NPOV) decent article because you don't think that your readers should
have access to this kind of information.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

Hi!

> What does this mean exactly? Whose good? Commerce is not evil,
> Wikipedia was born from it .... and is supported by it.

Um again.

> Wikipedia usage as a credible resource is the standard for measurement
> of its success. If folks don't think its credible,
> or view it as a novelty, then it has failed. Personal soapboxs
> aside.

I don't see direct link between [automated] censorship and credibility.

> I can think of nothing more powerful than every person on the
> planet one
> day owning their own personal wikipedia mirror. Now that's freedom
> to edit.

I somehow stay at the idea that there's more freedom, when you can
edit wikipedia without owning a mirror. Unless you want to fork ;-)

> Food costs money, rent costs money, computers cost money, hosting
> costs
> money, internet connectivity costs money -- the strings are that
> Danny and
> Jimbo have to pay everyones bills to keep it going.

Now strings are defined by community, as community supports Wikipedia.
I'm not CFO, so I'm quite happy about that ;-)

And I'm happy if there's anyone else who would like to support
without strings attached (especially on content), let it be some nice
big foundation.

On the other hand, currently computers and hosting are enjoying
economy of scale - we run quite efficient system, and cost to run
personal mirror (cost per view) may be somewhat higher than the cost
wmf is facing. This is where community joins and assists with keeping
the site up.

> And I can back up what I promise with action and solid delivery --
> not hot
> air :-).

Well, it is really nice that wikipedia activities attract people who
maintain the solid delivery!

> You have missed the point and I don't think understand my intentions.

Wikify the world? Intentions are clear, now the methods are not.
I guess concepts of distributed wikis might be better discussed at
wikitech-l rather than foundation-l. There it would be really more on
topic!

BR,
--
Domas Mituzas -- http://dammit.lt/ -- [[user:midom]]


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Domas Mituzas wrote:

>Um. You could share your technology, for common good, sure!
>
>
What does this mean exactly? Whose good? Commerce is not evil,
Wikipedia was born from it .... and is supported by it.

>I did not :(
>
>
That's clear....

>I just opened Five Pillars article, and I know that I may fail at
>'code of conduct' sometimes, sorry, but, Wikipedia has neutral point
>of view.
>No 'please donate' buttons will make filtered forks (a.k.a. mirrors)
>worth mentioning as "helping Wikipedia".
>
>
Wikipedia usage as a credible resource is the standard for measurement
of its success. If folks don't think its credible,
or view it as a novelty, then it has failed. Personal soapboxs aside.

>Filtered resource/mirror does not give full power to edit the free
>content.
>
>
I can think of nothing more powerful than every person on the planet one
day owning
their own personal wikipedia mirror. Now that's freedom to edit.

>Sure, $$$ attracts business people, and we have few business people
>here, but we have the pride of not taking that with strings attached.
>
>
Food costs money, rent costs money, computers cost money, hosting costs
money,
internet connectivity costs money -- the strings are that Danny and
Jimbo have to pay
everyones bills to keep it going. How about those who wish to funnel
$$$ into their efforts
by creating some viable revenue generating initiatives around it.

>We have pride to make free information resource ;-)
>
>
I have pride in creating translations to bring it to every native tribe
in the US and Hawaii. And I
can back up what I promise with action and solid delivery -- not hot
air :-).

>It would be an easy task to make a list of countries worth visiting
>to provide wikifilter (I'm quite amused to find wikifilter.org is
>still free ;-) - there're lots of things people should not know
>(because it is all very very depressing (c) Colbert ;-)
>
>
< But I hope foundation has more noble causes to exist. >

You have missed the point and I don't think understand my intentions.

Jeff

Thread taken off line ...

>Cheers,
>Domas
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:

> Disagree. I've talked to a lot of organizatons and groups who
> love WMF content but want to filter it for in-house use similiar
> to CleanFlix. Most educational facilities and religious groups
> who really love wikipedia want a "clean" version of the content,
> with most of the sexual revolution/pro-alternate lifestyle
> propoganda materials removed from the dumps.

You're confusing the issue. Those groups *don't* love Wikipedia.
We're not here to accomodate and please.

Just consider the "conservative group" in Germany only 70 years
ago that didn't want all this "propaganda" for interracial
marriage, etc. How would you adopt Wikipedia to suit them?


--
Lars Aronsson (lars@aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Domas Mituzas wrote:

>I somehow stay at the idea that there's more freedom, when you can
>edit wikipedia without owning a mirror. Unless you want to fork ;-)
>
>
>
I think that's what I was talking about. I forked and now there exists a
Cherokee Wikipedia and
soon a Uto-Aztecan Wikipedia. Read
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherokee_Clans. Forking
is how we established settlements all over the Southeast in ancient
times - banishment was a good thing
-- a sign of new beginnings. Forking seeds new communities -- without
the conflict.

>Now strings are defined by community, as community supports Wikipedia.
>I'm not CFO, so I'm quite happy about that ;-)
>
>
I thought they were defined by Society and Economics? The community
unfortunately
apparantly operates in a vacuum (based on my empirical observation) and
does not seem to
listen to the outside world much. Society seems to awaken it once in a
while with USA today
articles, then it scratches, rolls over, and goes back to sleep to the
outside world. Not a bad
model for keeping focus, but one that prevents its members from seeing
the forest for all the trees --
reminds me of the old Novell culture in the mid 1990s which was also a
self contained isolated
island in the middle of Utah Valley.

>
>
>Wikify the world? Intentions are clear, now the methods are not.
>I guess concepts of distributed wikis might be better discussed at
>wikitech-l rather than foundation-l. There it would be really more on
>topic!
>
>BR,
>
>
I find I work better alone on projects like these until the dinner is
prepared and ready to serve.
I am happy to share, but I want to get 98% of the way there before I
have to deal with the
organizational issues. I've done this stuff for 25 years and people slow
me down at times.

All my Wikilove,

Jeff


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l