Slashdot Mirror
Wikipedia Could Block 67 Million Verizon Customers
An anonymous reader writes "A particularly nasty Wikipedia vandal has forced a discussion to take place over whether to block edits from an address range used by over 67 million Verizon customers. Verizon has not responded to abusive Wikipedia users on their network before, even though the abusive Verizon users have released private information (phone numbers, etc.) of numerous individuals, and made countless threats that have also been reported to law enforcement. Wikipedia has done something similar in the past with users on the AOL network, which used proxy servers and thus allowed vandals to continue disrupting the site. Discussion is also taking place on alternate solutions to deal with abuse from this Verizon user, named 'Zsfgseg' on Wikipedia. If a block of millions is enacted, Verizon could potentially change how they assign IP addresses, or be forced at least to address a PR nightmare."
...They just won't care. Why do they care if their customers can't edit Wikipedia? Realistically, what is the ratio of viewers to contributes? As long as their customers can view it, I doubt there will be enough of an outcry for them to take any action at all.
It wouldn't stop blocked editors from simply re-registering and continuing their noble and righteous correction spree.
... why, exactly, the submitter thinks Verizon gives a rat's rear end whether or not their customers can edit Wikipedia pages?
#DeleteChrome
A little jail time might be in order as well
Get a grip. Wikipedia allows anonymous editing.No laws are being broken. Stop taking yourself so seriously. It's *not* becoming, and really, you look like a fool.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
This seems silly to me... why would Verizon care?
They shouldn't. That's what makes this such a non-story. The problem is that there are a lot of people ("editors" they call themselves, until they get to level 2 and become an "admin") who take Wikipedia waaay too seriously. Take this gem from TFA:
Verizon didn't seem to care. -- T. Canens
Are you kidding me? That idiot wasted hundreds of hours of admins time, spent all his free time libeling people, outer hundreds of Wikipedia editors by mass-creating hundreds of accounts the included their phone numbers (or so I've heard) and they don't care? What is wrong with those people? -- Access Denied
My biggest problem with Wikipedia is the direct source of stories like this. It's become a little pool and everyone is trying to be the biggest fish, for two reasons: First, that way they can create their own little kingdom of articles which they've "adopted", bullying people into a consensus which matches their own ideals/agenda. Second, they just want to feel important. Take that Access Denied fellow's name/signature thing for example. Bright red, obnoxious, disrupts the page flow, and yells to everyone, "Look at me, look at me!"
Wikipedia "editors" are such cute little things.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
I'm sorry, but this is Wikipedia's issue to deal with, not Verizon's. And, to imply otherwise is just trolling.
Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
It's not Verizon's responsibility to do anything unless people on their network are breaking laws. Last time I checked, general trolling was not against the law. (If it were, half the internet would be shutdown. :) )
Wikipedia needs to get their act together and secure their own site better. The fact that they're even considering blocking editing from /6s and /8s is absurd.
Most walls permit anonymous spray painting: are you contending that graffiti vandalism is not against laws in most jurisdictions?
While I agree that actively soliciting contributions is slightly different to the usual wall-owner's approach it still does not constitute an invitation from Wikipedia to be destructive.
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Rather than blocking a whole field of public IPv4 addresses, let's have Verizon (who's deploying an LTE network for phones) & Wikipedia (who already uses it on their backend) push big for IPv6 migration. This situation will become easier to manage, not harder.
Life is irony, and nothing ever goes as planned.
you're an idiot. who gave the idiot an account?
I AM MICHAEL KRISTOPEIT.
I don't know. Who did give MichaelKristopeit178 an account?
Try writing "fuck the police" on the police station with chalk and see if they think its vandalism.
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
I love Wikipedia. It is one of my favorite websites. I have a tab open there right now (doing some research on the oil embargo in the 1970s).
All that said, Verizon not only shouldn't be required to respond, they should be enjoined from responding barring due process under the law. Anonymous speech is one of the most important principles of true democracy. That does not mean that Wikipedia has to allow this abusive asshole's behavior, but they have no place asking Verizon to identify or chastize him.
If this was some sleazy politician asking Verizon to cut off a user who was posting incriminating evidence on the politician's web forum, we wouldn't bat an eyelash before condemning the politician and demanding that Verizon refuse.
Principles are the things you abide by even when the outcome is exceedingly distasteful. Anonymous speech is so vital to the practice of free speech that we must not stand for, let alone condone, infringement of it. Not even to stop this asshat from vandalizing one of the true wonders of the information age.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Slashdot's moderation system does more to promote groupthink than anything else. Most mods here are +1 agree or -1 disagree.
I don't want any more non-essential accounts. I'd just stop editing entirely. I'm sure I'm not alone.
My fixes are small but they generally stick, so I think they are deemed useful.
Rgds
Damon
http://m.earth.org.uk/
Detection and fixing takes time (and good will), and time is not free. Nor is reputational damage.
Criminal damage is not necessarily limited to physical objects.
Rgds
Damon
http://m.earth.org.uk/
It depends on the issue. Many times you'll get viewpoints from both sides modded up. Moderation on Slashdot is far from perfect, but overall it makes the site readable.
> Why not just require user registration for IPs that come from Verizon?
That's what the "ban" would do.
> I love the idea of being able to make anonymous edits, but seriously wouldn't it make their lives easier by just requiring it for everyone?
Anonymous edits are one of the corner-stones of Wikipedia. Just changing that because of a situation that is like a thousand ones before... I don't think so.
Which is why you don't mod down. If you find an already modded comment with serious flaws, you find a good response and mod that up instead.