Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

diff.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#41

Post by theamk »

willcipriano wrote: post #19
theamk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google scraping your sites is a bad thing, you want to set "nosnippet" tags on your page [0]. If Google scraping your sites is a good thing, then why are you complaining? I hope Google never starts paying for the links. Once there is a precedent, this becomes an effective blocker for the new search engines, visualizers, and other exciting web search startups. A new search engine startup is not going to be able to…

I similarly require that producers of motion pictures say "nosteal" at some point in the opening credits otherwise I assume I am free to make copies of the film to share with the internet.

They do, don't you remember those FBI notices in the movies? https://mashable.com/2012/05/10/fbi-copyright-warnings/

And when you sign up for netflix or cable tv, there is an agreement you accept that you are not going to pirate.

Remember, the nosnippet does not have to be on every page -- you can put into robots.txt or HTTP header, so it is literally 1 line of configuration for most web servers.

Movie producers can only dream of stopping piracy that easily.

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#42

Post by willcipriano »

theamk wrote: post #41
willcipriano wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I similarly require that producers of motion pictures say "nosteal" at some point in the opening credits otherwise I assume I am free to make copies of the film to share with the internet.

They do, don't you remember those FBI notices in the movies? https://mashable.com/2012/05/10/fbi-copyright-warnings/ And when you sign up for netflix or cable tv, there is an agreement you accept that you are not going to pirate. Remember, the nosnippet does not have to be on every page -- you can put into robots.txt or HTTP header, so it is literally 1 line of configuration for most web servers. Movie producers can…

> They do, don't you remember those FBI notices in the movies?

Oh I'm sorry I don't have the ability to look for that, my system is only equipped to look for that specific string.

> And when you sign up for netflix or cable tv, there is an agreement you accept that you are not going to pirate.

Again my system doesn't read the TOS, does Googles?

> Remember, the nosnippet does not have to be on every page -- you can put into robots.txt or HTTP header, so it is literally 1 line of configuration for most web servers.

Remember they just have to add the string "nosteal" to the opening credits. That's a few minutes in final cut pro.

Also, if they forgot to add it or have some other issue I offer no public facing customer service whatsoever.

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#43

Post by PopePompus »

mrkramer wrote: post #9

Why would Google pay for this when they already crawled and are crawling whole Wikipedia and have complete index of it? Better way for Wikipedia to earn extra revenue are affiliate links. A lot of people when they read and learn about some topic go to Amazon and buy a book about that topic. Wikipedia could embed book affiliate links and earn commission from book sales.

I do a lot of Wikipedia editing, and I'm fine with them monetizing an Enterprise API. But affiliate links are too close to advertising. IMHO one of the best features of Wikipedia is the lack of Ads, and if they start going down that route I'm gotta there.

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#44

Post by ROARosen »

With all due respect to Wikipedia for what it is, I believe their success is partly because of the 'altruistic' nature of their model. Sure, they should seek donations from huge companies like Google - which make tons of money off of their data - for the services they provide, but I feel like locking down the 'better' api to the public is not the way to go about it. It's just too often that a commercial offering just disincentives bettering the 'free' product.

Wikipedia as the product of a public good foundation should be just that; by the public, for the public, and accessible to the public (including all access methods and API's).

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#45

Post by dannyw »

ROARosen wrote: post #44

With all due respect to Wikipedia for what it is, I believe their success is partly because of the 'altruistic' nature of their model. Sure, they should seek donations from huge companies like Google - which make tons of money off of their data - for the services they provide, but I feel like locking down the 'better' api to the public is not the way to go about it. It's just too often that a commercial offering just…

Wikipedian here. We edit because we're contributing to free information. Free information means anyone can use it for any purpose, including commercially.

I think this move is great. I'd rather have this money go to the foundation, than ParseAPIco.

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#46

Post by throwaway53453 »

Clewza313 wrote: post #37
judge2020 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they are already a big donor: https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/annualreport/2019-annu... > Google Matching Gifts Program

If you work at Google, they will 1:1 match donations to virtually any non-profit, plus there's various charity drives where employees get to donate company money. So the match program can become a huge donor just off random Googlers donating.

The distinction doesn't really matter though, does it? Makes no different if it's Googlers as opposed to Google itself.

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#47

Post by theamk »

willcipriano wrote: post #42
theamk wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do, don't you remember those FBI notices in the movies? https://mashable.com/2012/05/10/fbi-copyright-warnings/ And when you sign up for netflix or cable tv, there is an agreement you accept that you are not going to pirate. Remember, the nosnippet does not have to be on every page -- you can put into robots.txt or HTTP header, so it is literally 1 line of configuration for most web servers. Movie producers can…

> They do, don't you remember those FBI notices in the movies? Oh I'm sorry I don't have the ability to look for that, my system is only equipped to look for that specific string. > And when you sign up for netflix or cable tv, there is an agreement you accept that you are not going to pirate. Again my system doesn't read the TOS, does Googles? > Remember, the nosnippet does not have to be on every page -- you can pu…

I think you are trying to claim that Google goes further than DVD or netflix, but this analogy is really not working for you.

DVDs have technological protection as well -- the CSS[0] system. So yes, if you don't want your movie to be pirated you need to explicitly enable this. This was probably harder than creating robots.txt too, there were NDAs and stuff involved.

The netflix requires logging in to access the content. If you add the same requirement, then Google is not going to take your snippets.

Unlike the string "nosteal", the robots.txt file is not Google invention, it is as much part of the web standards as all other technologies.

If you want a website, you need a server which can support HTTP, HTML, CSS, links, robots.txt and so on. You can omit parts you don't need, but then you _may_ suffer the consequences -- without CSS your site will be ugly, and without robots.txt your site will be scraped by Google.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Scramble_System

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#48

Post by theamk »

jlawer wrote: post #11
theamk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google scraping your sites is a bad thing, you want to set "nosnippet" tags on your page [0]. If Google scraping your sites is a good thing, then why are you complaining? I hope Google never starts paying for the links. Once there is a precedent, this becomes an effective blocker for the new search engines, visualizers, and other exciting web search startups. A new search engine startup is not going to be able to…

The one issue I see with this is it is always Opt Out. I feel that google really should be lining up partners to opt-in. While I am sure there is reasons why Google believe they have the right (and a good case can be made), it always feels slightly entitled to just assume that people are OK with this being done to their content. That being said, of all the sources, Wikipedia actively license their content in such a w…

> And I agree that this will be a dampener on any competition, I think the era of "ask for forgiveness, rather then permission" needs to stop.

Does this mean that you think there should be less competition for Google?

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#49

Post by ROARosen »

dannyw wrote: post #45
ROARosen wrote: post #44

With all due respect to Wikipedia for what it is, I believe their success is partly because of the 'altruistic' nature of their model. Sure, they should seek donations from huge companies like Google - which make tons of money off of their data - for the services they provide, but I feel like locking down the 'better' api to the public is not the way to go about it. It's just too often that a commercial offering just…

Wikipedian here. We edit because we're contributing to free information. Free information means anyone can use it for any purpose, including commercially. I think this move is great. I'd rather have this money go to the foundation, than ParseAPIco.

> Free information means anyone can use it ...

Of course anyone can use it commercially and for whichever reason they like. But by creating a walled 'premium' offering you are going against the premise of 'anyone can use it' since not anyone can use the commercial api.

Surely if Google or anyone wants the api so badly they're willing to pay for it, they should fund it. Why does that mean it needs to be 'locked'?

Re: Introducing the Wikimedia Enterprise API

#50

Post by hkai »

ROARosen wrote: post #44

With all due respect to Wikipedia for what it is, I believe their success is partly because of the 'altruistic' nature of their model. Sure, they should seek donations from huge companies like Google - which make tons of money off of their data - for the services they provide, but I feel like locking down the 'better' api to the public is not the way to go about it. It's just too often that a commercial offering just…

The altruistic model seems to be doing not that well. The number of editors peaked in 2007 and has been going down since.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians#Number_o...

Post reply on HN