Hi Erik, I get the feeling you would question my identity if I didn't follow up by asking you whether they asked you to endorse the possibility that Mandarin could eclipse English?
Best regards, James On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Erik Moeller <eloque...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think it would be good to do some legal work to gain that clarity. The >> Amazon Echo issue, with the Echo potentially using millions of words from >> Wikipedia without any kind of attribution and indication of provenance at >> all, was raised on this list in July for example. > > There is some basic attribution in the Alexa app (which keeps a log of > all transactions). As I said, I don't see a reason not to include > basic attribution in the voice response as well, but it still seems > worth pointing out. Here's what it looks like in the app (yup, it > really does say "Image: Wikipedia", which is all too typical): > > https://imgur.com/a/vchAl > > I'm all in favor of a legal opinion on bulk use of introductory > snippets from Wikimedia articles without attribution/license > statement. While I'm obviously not a lawyer, I do, however, sincerely > doubt that it would give you the clarity you seek, given the extremely > unusual nature of authorship of Wikipedia, and the unusual nature of > the re-use. I suspect that such clarity would result only from legal > action, which I would consider to be extremely ill-advised, and which > WMF almost certainly lacks standing to pursue on its own. > >> If CC-BY-SA is not enforced, Wikipedia will stealthily >> shift to CC-0 in practice. I don't think that's desirable. > > Regardless of the legal issue, I agree that nudging re-users to > attribute content is useful to reinforce the concept that such > attribution goes with re-use. Even with CC-0, showing > providence/citations is a good idea. > >> An interesting question to me is whether, with the explosion of information >> available, people will spend so much time with transactional queries across >> a large number of diverse topics that there is little time left for >> immersive, in-depth learning of any one of them, and how that might >> gradually change the type of knowledge people possess (information >> overload). > > It's a fair question; the Internet has certainly pushed our ability to > externalize knowledge into overdrive. Perhaps we've already passed the > point where this is a difference in kind, rather than a difference in > degree, compared with how we've shared knowledge in the past; if > [[Neuralink]] doesn't turn out to be vaporware, it may push us over > that edge. :P > > That said, people have to acquire specialized domain knowledge to make > a living, and the explosive growth of many immersive learning > platforms (course platforms like edX, Coursera, Udacity; language > learning tools like Duolingo; the vast educational YouTube community, > etc.) suggests that there is a very large demand. While I share some > of your concerns about the role of for-profit gatekeepers to > knowledge, I am not genuinely worried that the availability of > transactional "instant answers" will quench our innate thirst for > knowledge or our need to develop new skills. > > I'm most concerned about information systems that deliver highly > effective emotional "hits" and are therefore more habit-forming and > appealing than Wikipedia, Google, or a good book. The negative effect > of high early childhood TV use on attention is well-documented, and > excessive use of social media (which are continuously optimized to be > habit-forming) may have similar effects. Alarmist "Facebook is more > addictive than crack" headlines aside, the reality is that social > media are great delivery vehicles for the kinds of little rewards that > keep you coming back. > > In this competition for attention, Wikipedia articles, especially in > STEM topics, have a well-deserved reputation of often being nearly > impenetrable for people not already familiar with a given domain. > While we will never be able to reach everyone, we should be able to > reach people who _want_ to learn but have a hard time staying focused > enough to do so, due to a very low frustration tolerance. > > I think one way to bottom line any Wikimedia strategy is to ask > whether it results in people getting better learning experiences, > through WMF's sites or through affiliates and partners. Personally, I > think the long term focus on "knowledge as a service" and "knowledge > equity" is right on target, but it's also useful to explicitly think > about good old Wikipedia and how it might benefit directly. Here are > some things that I think might help develop better learning > experiences on Wikipedia: > > - a next generation templating system optimized for data exploration, > timelines, etc., with greater separation of design, code, data and > text > - better support for writing/finding articles that target different > audiences (beginners/experts) > - tech standards and requirements for embedding rich, interactive > "explorable explanations" beyond what any template system can do > - commissioned illustrations or animations for highly complex topics > (possibly organized through another nonprofit) > - assessment partnerships with external groups to verify that learners > get what they need from a given resource > > In practice, this could translate to: > > - beautiful animations illustrating concepts like the immune system, > the Big Bang, or the inner workings of different engine types > - custom interactive explanations for concepts in statistics or > mathematics, such as the ones in > http://students.brown.edu/seeing-theory/ > - code that you can interact with in articles _about_ code like > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quicksort > - highly visual explorables for topics that benefit from it -- Thedore > Grey's award-winning "Elements" app is a nice example: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FesjAdIWBk > - better ways to go from one article to the next: data visualizations, > topic maps, dynamic lists, etc. > > The reason I think this matches well with what's stated in the > strategy is that it's clear that Wikimedia cannot do it alone. Many > interactive applications will require the kind of open data platform > that Wikidata will hopefully become. Revision metadata APIs (with some > form of write access) may make it easier for folks to help with the > assessment of content quality. > > The international education space (schools, colleges, unis) may often > seem intractable and difficult to navigate. But from what I can tell, > there's been a slow and steady shift away from crappy Flash/Java > applets to more reusable HTML5 components and open repositories. The > value of open licensing has become increasingly apparent to countless > public institutions. > > By sharpening their own role in these networks, WMF and other movement > organizations may be able to positively influence decisions on > questions like licensing, internationalization, and technology choice. > >> Since we last discussed this, I've come across a great research paper on >> Meta, "Considering 2030: Future technology trends that will impact the >> Wikimedia movement", prepared for WMF by independent consultants Dot >> Connector Studio (Philadelphia) and Lutman & Associates (St Paul): >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources/Considering_2030:_Future_technology_trends_that_will_impact_the_Wikimedia_movement >> >> The sections "Things to keep in mind" and "Questions for the Wikimedia >> movement to consider" most closely reflect my own concerns. > > I agree with the authors of this paper that WMF should carefully > position itself between early adopter and "laggard" when it comes to > new tech. Finding ways how tech can aid learning/collaboration, and > become part of the commons, turns WMF into a leader from the > perspective of many other organizations that are concerned with > delivering knowledge and learning, and a follower from the perspective > of tech companies. It's a special place to be. :) > > Erik > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
