The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Why Is Wikipedia Still Doling Out Porn?, It's a dirty job, and there's no one else doing it?
HRIP7
post Sat 25th February 2012, 5:22am
Post #21


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm
Member No.: 17,020

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 25th February 2012, 5:04am) *

That's the essence of it -- Wikimedia's approach is profoundly hypocritical and absurd. They love the free
content their volunteers generate, but they dare not piss off a substantial percentage of their crazed
fan-following by censoring and filtering anything. And you need Fox News, never a paragon of consistency
or journalistic integrity (like it or not, that's their reputation), to point it out. Not good, no matter
what your position on penis photos is -- or on Fox News.

Quite. The main reason they abandoned the idea of categorising and tagging media files was not that it would be an impossible amount of work – "not possible when you reach across hundreds of nations and cultures. As a volunteer, non-profit project we're simply not resourced to do that."

Everyone agrees that 95% of the really graphic material could be identified in a couple of afternoons, just using the existing category system.

The real reason was that the Germans said they would walk out if anyone did that.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sat 25th February 2012, 9:08am
Post #22


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Sat 25th February 2012, 5:22am) *


Everyone agrees that 95% of the really graphic material could be identified in a couple of afternoons, just using the existing category system.

The real reason was that the Germans said they would walk out if anyone did that.



When flickr introduced its filtering system the Germans were the most vocal in their opposition. Though that was mainly because flickr locked down German users so that they couldn't see any porn at all. The Yahoo! lawyers had decided that German law on the protection of Children made German employees vulnerable to such laws. The problem being that Germany requires an age-verification system for accessing pornographic content, and such a system on an international bases is not possible, or at least not something that Yahoo were prepared to implement. Thus they cut off access to all 18+ content to anyone that had a yahoo.de account. The row went on for over a year with a load of users threatening to walk. Yahoo stood firm, and hardly anyone did. A few went off to ipernity but then came back.
http://www.quora.com/Flickr/Why-does-Flick...rmany-and-India

Now the problem with Germany is that wikipedia have servers there, do they have any staff there too? If so they will come under German laws protecting children, and German law is pretty clear if you're content is aimed at German users (language will do) and it contains content that is foul of the child protection laws, then you either put in place technical measures to ensure that under 18s can't access it, or you DELETE the content in its entirety.

So if someone really wants to put the cat amongst the pigeons what they should do is interest the guys at the jugendschutz. Now I find the wikip[edia section on this rather amusing:

QUOTE

Flickr management, unwilling to go into legal details, implied that the reason for the stringent filtering was some unusually strict age-verification laws in Germany. The issue received attention in the German national media, especially in online publications. Initial reports indicated that Flickr's action was a sensible, if unattractive, precaution against prosecution, although later coverage implied that Flickr's action may have been unnecessarily strict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flickr#Censorship


Because what the head of the jugendschutz was saying was:
QUOTE

Now Friedemann Schindler, head of jugendschutz.net (which is the German government’s initiative for youth protection on the Internet), responded to yahoo’s claims, arguing that yahoo’s “solution” “exceeds the legal requirements”, because as a hosting provider, they are only required to remove illegal content once they are notified of its existence.
http://www.telekom.com/corporate-responsib...ompetence/65106


IOW if you are notified and you don't have an age-verification system then you delete.

Amusingly though their filtering system would not be sufficient and they are likely to be in the same situation as the "Virgin Killer" issue, but with a legislation that is aimed at pornography.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sat 25th February 2012, 10:27am
Post #23


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Larry Sanger @ Sat 25th February 2012, 3:16am) *

Even if a parent is looking over the child's shoulder, he should have the ability to determine whether a child should be shown the full monty. Wikip/media doesn't give him that ability. And besides, it's not only about children. Some adults don't want to be confronted with these images, and would strongly prefer to be able to exclude them from searches and so forth that they make, just as Google Image Search (not at all for prudes--when safe search is off!) does.


On flickr the images have to be flagged to match the 'safe', 'moderate', and 'restricted' filtering. There is no exception. Even if you have the image private viewable only by yourself, it must be correctly flagged.

Posted links outside of flickr should not be directly to sites containing adult content, if it is to a commercial porn site then your account is toast. If it is to a none commercial site then the link should be to a visually safe area of the site. IOW flickr maintain that people following links should have the option to back out before having porn on their screens. They are conscious of someone say at a school reading a discussion forum clicking a link and then having a page of "Barely legal cum sluts" on their screen.

Flickr has a comment system and groups where discussions can take place. Groups can be restricted to 18+ members. As flickr does not have a filtering system for inlined imaged. It is an account terminating offence to inline link any pornographic image into any discussion or comment thread. That rule applies regardless of whether the group is 18+ or not. Again the reasoning is that someone may well be browsing a discussion forum during a lunch break, and not want to have to explain why they were looking at Sally Mann images at school.

Traditionally flickr went a little easy on that particular rule, given the nature of the group involved, and only really enforced it if someone was 'flashing'. However, recently the flickr abuse team has been laid off. Abuse reports are now handled by Yahoo directly. This is resulting in strict adherence to the non inline linking and violators are having their yahoo accounts including email deleted as well as their flickr account.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HRIP7
post Sat 25th February 2012, 12:57pm
Post #24


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm
Member No.: 17,020

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(lilburne @ Sat 25th February 2012, 9:08am) *

QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Sat 25th February 2012, 5:22am) *


Everyone agrees that 95% of the really graphic material could be identified in a couple of afternoons, just using the existing category system.

The real reason was that the Germans said they would walk out if anyone did that.



When flickr introduced its filtering system the Germans were the most vocal in their opposition. Though that was mainly because flickr locked down German users so that they couldn't see any porn at all. The Yahoo! lawyers had decided that German law on the protection of Children made German employees vulnerable to such laws. The problem being that Germany requires an age-verification system for accessing pornographic content, and such a system on an international bases is not possible, or at least not something that Yahoo were prepared to implement. Thus they cut off access to all 18+ content to anyone that had a yahoo.de account. The row went on for over a year with a load of users threatening to walk. Yahoo stood firm, and hardly anyone did. A few went off to ipernity but then came back.
http://www.quora.com/Flickr/Why-does-Flick...rmany-and-India

Now the problem with Germany is that wikipedia have servers there, do they have any staff there too? If so they will come under German laws protecting children, and German law is pretty clear if you're content is aimed at German users (language will do) and it contains content that is foul of the child protection laws, then you either put in place technical measures to ensure that under 18s can't access it, or you DELETE the content in its entirety.

So if someone really wants to put the cat amongst the pigeons what they should do is interest the guys at the jugendschutz. Now I find the wikip[edia section on this rather amusing:

QUOTE

Flickr management, unwilling to go into legal details, implied that the reason for the stringent filtering was some unusually strict age-verification laws in Germany. The issue received attention in the German national media, especially in online publications. Initial reports indicated that Flickr's action was a sensible, if unattractive, precaution against prosecution, although later coverage implied that Flickr's action may have been unnecessarily strict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flickr#Censorship


Because what the head of the jugendschutz was saying was:
QUOTE

Now Friedemann Schindler, head of jugendschutz.net (which is the German government’s initiative for youth protection on the Internet), responded to yahoo’s claims, arguing that yahoo’s “solution” “exceeds the legal requirements”, because as a hosting provider, they are only required to remove illegal content once they are notified of its existence.
http://www.telekom.com/corporate-responsib...ompetence/65106


IOW if you are notified and you don't have an age-verification system then you delete.

Amusingly though their filtering system would not be sufficient and they are likely to be in the same situation as the "Virgin Killer" issue, but with a legislation that is aimed at pornography.

All of that is correct. There's just one thing – I am not aware that Wikimedia have servers in Germany. As far as I am aware, Commons and German Wikipedia are stored on servers in Florida.

German users have mentioned in the debate that public hot spots and public computers for Internet access are censored in Germany, to the extent that even some non-pornographic sites are inaccessible. So they have the experience of censorship.

They also have the experience of a very public controversy over a proposed child pornography law that the German government wanted to introduce; see "Family Minister vs. Freedom of Speech: Anti-Child Pornography Law Flounders":

QUOTE
Germany's family minister wants a law blocking Web sites that contain child pornography. But critics say the law could be used to censor just about anything -- and that it wouldn't be effective in the first place.


In the end, the law was first signed into legislation and then disowned by the government that introduced it ("The Law that Nobody Wanted: New Internet Legislation Embarrasses German Government".

The free-speech activists won. To the German Wikipedians, the image filter proposal feels just the same, and they are hopeful that the ultimate outcome will be just the same.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Selina
post Sat 25th February 2012, 2:27pm
Post #25


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Screw fox news. I LIKED uncensored internet when I was little, I'd probably be a lot less cool if I hadn't had unrestricted learning of the world. Reading (or seeing) "naughty" stuff never did me any harm, if people don't like it they can stop reading/looking... I visited chat rooms when I was about 11, but I was more mature than most. *Shrug* There always needs to be a failsafe that lets smart people bypass filters, cos if you are smart enough then you're proven capable of handling whatever you want I think really. I never had any real problems cos I was smart and never attached any personal info (until later when I was older and knew where was safe and where wasn't). There's just too many idiots on the internet now, lol.

Facebook ethics: No nipples; blood only - Leaked Facebook censorship policy from outsourcing company oDesk (T-H-L-K-D), RT.com, 16th February 2012:

^ Welcome to the new sweatshops (T-H-L-K-D)... Literally, an army of hired anonymous minions.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cedric
post Sat 25th February 2012, 3:52pm
Post #26


General Gato
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,648
Joined: Sun 11th Mar 2007, 5:58pm
From: God's Ain Country
Member No.: 1,116

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Larry Sanger @ Fri 24th February 2012, 9:16pm) *

The comments by Jay Walsh are, predictably, ridiculous.

That's because Jay himself is predictably ridiculous.

QUOTE
I want to see some serious journalist describe a half-dozen extremely explicit images on Wikipedia and Commons, then read the bit from Q Boyer to Jimmy Wales, and then ask, "It's been almost two years. Why hasn't Wikipedia adopted some common-sense filter of that sort, a filter that even a pornography company uses?" I would add: "Aren't you ashamed to be associated with an organization that drags its feet on such a thing even while recommending that the site be used by school children?"

I know the answers to this, too. Pornographers think nothing of paying market price for the software to establish such a filter. It's nothing more than a business-to-business transaction, after all. To the Frei Kultur Kinder (a/k/a "freetards") that have the run of Wikipedia and over-awe the Wikimedia Foundation, that is more than merely the wrong approach, it is damnable heresy for which the offender that merely suggests it can expect a swift online auto de fey. Actually having to pay professionals for the software is deeply and exceeding offensive to their anti-corporate, "penises just want to be free" quasi-religion.

As for Jimbo, I sense no capacity for shame, but rather a capacity to sense danger to his revenue streams. Not the most highly developed capacity, as revealed by the Siegenthaler and Essjay scandals, but some capacity. His income as a public speaker and "web guru" is highly dependent on the public perception of WP. This is a big part of the reason why he is rarely seen to intervene in a content dispute until it is clear it is about to approach a Category 5 media shitstorm.

I do agree with you that the story in general is well-researched and on target, despite being a product of the perjurious wiretapping Murdochopoly. However, there is one major fact the story misses out: the fact that the WMF lacks the authority to do anything about the porn problem. Even here, many seem to have forgotten that a big part of the deal Jimbo made with teh communitah back in 2003 during the transfer of ownership from Bomis to the newly created WMF was that the WMF would primarily serve as a support organization for WP with no rights of management over content or site administration. The only small exception has been the "WP:OFFICE" policy, which essentially only covers claims of defamation and copyright infringement made by people with the means to hire lawyers to spend the WMF out of existence through costly litigation. These rights of management were already effectively in the hands of teh communitah due to Jimbo's largely hands-off management style (your terminology, I think), so the understanding was that would remain unchanged. The WMF has constantly reaffirmed this. It was simply another one of the compromises Jimbo had to make to keep teh communitah on site and toiling away for nothing, instead of deserting en masse as they likely would have done otherwise.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sat 25th February 2012, 5:12pm
Post #27


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Selina @ Sat 25th February 2012, 2:27pm) *

I visited chat rooms when I was about 11, but I was more mature than most. *shrug*


Does visiting chat rooms at such an early age lead to arrested development, do you think. *peers over top of glasses in old fart kind of way*
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Selina
post Sat 25th February 2012, 5:59pm
Post #28


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



ha tongue.gif Well, my point is for me at least it did the exact opposite, it gave me a chance to learn fast >:] Protect the stupid and impressionable from themselves definitely, but blocking the kind of girl who read novels in primary school would've been just a crime, I dread to imagine if I had more neurotic parents seriously I'd probably be someone completely different (I remember when I caught my dad reading my emails I was very pissed off, I worked it out because when I opened Outlook the folder had changed ha, I still remember it.) - outside the cities, the UK is a pretty bland place to grow up til you can get to the cities

I don't like this Facebook "bright new future" of everything being monitored by anonymous minions behind monitors, who have no choice to work or starve, it's reducing humanity to just an industry... amazon mechanical turk indeed, ugh...
I think that is how the WMF could become if they gave into Fox News... And that would be far worse, I think I'd take openness over that even if I'd rather not see some stuff (and they definitely need to get a grip on pictures of the children ugh), it's like why I don't agree with a lot of things the US does, but however bad they get they are never as bad as a world ruled by the Party in China, or Iran would be like unhappy.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Michaeldsuarez
post Mon 27th February 2012, 6:27pm
Post #29


Über Member
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm
From: New York, New York
Member No.: 24,428

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:...kumizu_Girl.jpg

Commons is hosting bottomless lolicons.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Mon 27th February 2012, 6:31pm
Post #30


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 27th February 2012, 6:27pm) *

Sounds like just your type of place, sleazebag.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Mon 27th February 2012, 7:10pm
Post #31


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Mon 27th February 2012, 6:31pm) *

QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 27th February 2012, 6:27pm) *

Sounds like just your type of place, sleazebag.



QUOTE

I would like to thank 95.x for providing these useful references. We need to remember that child pornography, and the brutal exploitation that implies, is a $3 billion industry. Some people here argue against hosting any image, even those clearly legal because they are drawings or simulations, which appears to come close to that territory; nonetheless, we must remember that every encroachment means money stolen from the organized criminals who expect the police to protect their business model. Wikimedia Commons can do real, tangible ''good'' by advancing free culture even in this most controversial of cases. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 16:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=479137835


And to think just a couple of weeks ago he was complaining about being called a fool.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Michaeldsuarez
post Mon 27th February 2012, 8:21pm
Post #32


Über Member
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm
From: New York, New York
Member No.: 24,428

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=67609655:

QUOTE
{{vk}} I see blue top and skin colour bikini bottom. What do you see? It illustrates a young girls Sukumizu with two parts. Seems to me she is even way past puberty. Honi soit qui mal y pense! --[[User:Paddy|Paddy]] ([[User talk:Paddy|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 19:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=67610393:

QUOTE
{{vk}}, agree with analysis by {{user|Niabot}}. And also {{user|Paddy}} has it right — it's a skin-colour bikini bottom. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Why are these people claiming to know that it's a "skin-colour bikini bottom"? How do they know the intentions of the artist / uploader? Can they read the artist's mind from behind a computer screen? How many children wear skin-colored swimwear? How many parents want their children to be paraded around a school pool in skin-colored swimwear? The people on Commons are denying the obvious and are making up excuses for the uploader to use later.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Selina
post Mon 27th February 2012, 8:52pm
Post #33


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



ED does a pretty good job at covering pedophiles, I'll give them that
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Text
post Mon 27th February 2012, 9:03pm
Post #34


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun 1st Nov 2009, 3:08pm
Member No.: 15,107



QUOTE
Why are these people claiming to know that it's a "skin-colour bikini bottom"? How do they know the intentions of the artist / uploader? Can they read the artist's mind from behind a computer screen? How many children wear skin-colored swimwear? How many parents want their children to be paraded around a school pool in skin-colored swimwear? The people on Commons are denying the obvious and are making up excuses for the uploader to use later.


Commons is now a Booru board http://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=list&tags=kasuga39
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Mon 27th February 2012, 9:21pm
Post #35


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



<whatevs>

This post has been edited by thekohser: Mon 27th February 2012, 9:23pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Mon 27th February 2012, 9:41pm
Post #36


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 27th February 2012, 9:21pm) *

<whatevs>


Of course part of the Fox article motivation is a side swipe at the SOPA blackout.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16574977
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Mon 27th February 2012, 9:50pm
Post #37


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(lilburne @ Mon 27th February 2012, 4:41pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 27th February 2012, 9:21pm) *

<whatevs>


Of course part of the Fox article motivation is a side swipe at the SOPA blackout.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16574977


Lil, I was just bitching about the fact that Selina had moved another one of my posts -- from this thread to another thread, without the usual notation that content had been moved. But then I decided it's her web domain, so she can shit on whomever she wants.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Mon 27th February 2012, 9:51pm
Post #38


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs




QUOTE
{{vk}} I see blue top and skin colour bikini bottom. What do you see? It illustrates a young girls Sukumizu with two parts. Seems to me she is even way past puberty. Honi soit qui mal y pense! --[[User:Paddy|Paddy]] ([[User talk:Paddy|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 19:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

QUOTE
{{vk}}, agree with analysis by {{user|Niabot}}. And also {{user|Paddy}} has it right — it's a skin-colour bikini bottom. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Ooohhh! Now I HAVE to write this up! People will refuse to believe it.....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Text
post Mon 27th February 2012, 11:23pm
Post #39


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun 1st Nov 2009, 3:08pm
Member No.: 15,107



QUOTE
I see blue top and skin colour bikini bottom. What do you see?


It's an ink blot test!
I see an orc holding a sign which says 1/10. I wonder what that is?

QUOTE
But then I decided it's her web domain, so she can shit on whomever she wants.


Cleveland Steamer?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HRIP7
post Tue 28th February 2012, 2:57am
Post #40


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm
Member No.: 17,020

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 27th February 2012, 9:51pm) *
Ooohhh! Now I HAVE to write this up! People will refuse to believe it.....
You should be able to find a few good quotes in the Fox News complains about porn on Commons again thread on Jimbo's talk page as well. Like –
QUOTE
Commons [...] serves multiple roles and in an extreme it would still do it's job if it is the source for the first free licensed porn site
That tax-exempt educational content sure is in good hands.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th 9 17, 7:08pm