[Script Info]
Title: 
[Events]
Format: Layer, Start, End, Style, Name, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Effect, Text
Dialogue: 0,0:00:00.00,0:00:18.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}36C3 preroll music{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:00:18.75,0:00:24.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Herald Angel: Please welcome our next\Nspeaker, Adam. Adam will be talking about
Dialogue: 0,0:00:24.13,0:00:31.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the politics of a supposedly neutral and\Nhow you can read them Adam calls himself a
Dialogue: 0,0:00:31.45,0:00:39.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,survivor of the American capitalism so\Nplease give it up to Adam and enjoy
Dialogue: 0,0:00:39.24,0:00:51.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}applause{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:00:51.29,0:00:55.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Adam: {\i1}inaudible{\i0} can you move the mic in\NYes, thank you. hi so originally this
Dialogue: 0,0:00:55.58,0:00:59.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,talk was supposed to be about algorithms\Nand then I realized that I was falling
Dialogue: 0,0:00:59.70,0:01:07.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,prey to exactly the thing I was trying to\Ncritique so I expanded the title a bit
Dialogue: 0,0:01:07.26,0:01:12.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the talk between the entire system and
Dialogue: 0,0:01:12.54,0:01:18.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,an algorithm that is the kind of the\Npiece that is hard to discuss so I wanted
Dialogue: 0,0:01:18.08,0:01:25.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to just start with mathematical\Nformalisms this is a variable it doesn't
Dialogue: 0,0:01:25.44,0:01:30.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,seem to have any political implications\Non its own other than it can be used for a
Dialogue: 0,0:01:30.11,0:01:35.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lot of things it can it can stand for\Nanything here's a variable squared this
Dialogue: 0,0:01:35.09,0:01:41.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,might have implications this could be used\Nto calculate the area of property that
Dialogue: 0,0:01:41.36,0:01:50.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you own this may be fewer may be something\Nelectrical triangles could be used in
Dialogue: 0,0:01:50.19,0:01:58.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,some kind of projection of Cartesian\Ncoordinates over indigenous landscapes
Dialogue: 0,0:01:58.46,0:02:07.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this goes boom now we start getting into\Nactual applications so yeah most of this
Dialogue: 0,0:02:07.77,0:02:13.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,might seem obvious or it might seem\Ncompletely foreign so just help fidget or
Dialogue: 0,0:02:13.17,0:02:20.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,something to give me cues yeah\Nmathematical formalism are sometimes
Dialogue: 0,0:02:20.85,0:02:28.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,considered objective but obviously they\Nonly exist in a context so Howard Zinn has
Dialogue: 0,0:02:28.01,0:02:32.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a book about his life called you can't be\Nneutral on a moving train there is that
Dialogue: 0,0:02:32.44,0:02:37.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,any mathematics exists in social\Ncontext that were constructed for a
Dialogue: 0,0:02:37.53,0:02:43.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reason and then omission is almost equally\Nimportant if depending on what's
Dialogue: 0,0:02:43.29,0:02:46.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,happening it could be more important\Nomission would just be the things that
Dialogue: 0,0:02:46.91,0:02:52.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are not included in your formula and your\Nalgorithm silence is the voice of
Dialogue: 0,0:02:52.53,0:02:59.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,complicity I'm sort of misusing that but\Nno algorithms are the same as anything
Dialogue: 0,0:02:59.00,0:03:02.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,else you should follow the money if you\Nwant to understand what's happening it's
Dialogue: 0,0:03:02.84,0:03:08.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,just a materialist and pretty effective\Nway of understanding things think about
Dialogue: 0,0:03:08.30,0:03:13.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,who created the algorithm what is it used\Nfor what types of effects might it
Dialogue: 0,0:03:13.94,0:03:18.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have and what would the alternatives be if\Nthis wasn't the way that the subject
Dialogue: 0,0:03:18.77,0:03:25.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,matter was being treated. Unfortunately\Nalgorithms are almost never part of
Dialogue: 0,0:03:25.31,0:03:31.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,public debate they're hidden there\Nthey're the private property of
Dialogue: 0,0:03:31.58,0:03:36.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,corporations of governments who don't\Nthink that we need to know what the
Dialogue: 0,0:03:36.94,0:03:42.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,details are they're hidden intentionally\Nor not behind the language of
Dialogue: 0,0:03:42.80,0:03:49.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,mathematics so in order to critique this\Nat this level of mathematical formula
Dialogue: 0,0:03:49.07,0:03:55.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you need to be literate in both\Nmathematics and politics or sociology just
Dialogue: 0,0:03:55.71,0:03:59.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they don't necessarily go together that\Nthat immediately narrows down the number
Dialogue: 0,0:03:59.48,0:04:05.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of people who might be talking about the\Ncontent of a formula so all I'm doing
Dialogue: 0,0:04:05.87,0:04:10.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,here is I'm just giving a few examples and\Nshowing how something that might be
Dialogue: 0,0:04:10.78,0:04:16.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,neutral is absolutely not I'm starting\Nwith human population, population
Dialogue: 0,0:04:16.69,0:04:26.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,obviously has been a hot subject for\Ncenturies and the projections are wildly
Dialogue: 0,0:04:26.56,0:04:31.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,different and hypothetical and obviously\Nit matters a lot we're at a turning point
Dialogue: 0,0:04:31.64,0:04:37.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in our planets ecology at least and so\Nwhen you see a graph like this you need to
Dialogue: 0,0:04:37.23,0:04:42.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,think what is this ? Why does it have\Nsuch a wide range ? There's this blue line
Dialogue: 0,0:04:42.79,0:04:46.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that goes straight up but then there's\Nthis other line that looks like some type
Dialogue: 0,0:04:46.57,0:04:54.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of collapse or rebound back down to a\Nsustainable level and then you have the
Dialogue: 0,0:04:54.78,0:05:00.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if you look at who's putting this out\Nthere they're not interested in the
Dialogue: 0,0:05:00.97,0:05:06.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,political aspects at this top level they\Nactually want to take those out of their
Dialogue: 0,0:05:06.36,0:05:13.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,predictions although you see something\Nlike the red dashed lines and those are
Dialogue: 0,0:05:13.08,0:05:21.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,80 % prediction certainty and the dotted\Nlines are 95 % prediction certainty
Dialogue: 0,0:05:21.10,0:05:25.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I would say that's all pretty unlikely\Nbecause they haven't factored in some
Dialogue: 0,0:05:25.64,0:05:31.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important parts about the world such as\Nthe Earth's carrying capacity most
Dialogue: 0,0:05:31.62,0:05:38.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,estimates say that this red line or sorry\Nthe estimates are very different but one
Dialogue: 0,0:05:38.34,0:05:42.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,plausible estimate is that we passed the\NEarth's carrying capacity in 1992 in
Dialogue: 0,0:05:42.99,0:05:48.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,which case most of these curves are bogus\Nand something entirely different is going
Dialogue: 0,0:05:48.81,0:05:55.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to happen to not include that in your\Npopulation projections is, I would say,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:55.21,0:06:03.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,irresponsible. Here's another publication\Nby the same well-meaning organization but
Dialogue: 0,0:06:03.24,0:06:08.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this you can see there's, well, I'll let\Nyou think about what that means for a
Dialogue: 0,0:06:08.84,0:06:15.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,second yourself this is the population \Nchange in each country given in as
Dialogue: 0,0:06:15.14,0:06:20.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a heat map so you see some populations\Nare growing more slowly than others some
Dialogue: 0,0:06:20.20,0:06:23.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are growing quickly and you see these\Nlittle buttons at the bottom let you look
Dialogue: 0,0:06:23.94,0:06:27.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,at the more developed and least developed\Nregions which is another obstacle to
Dialogue: 0,0:06:27.90,0:06:32.92,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,participation, it's a pretty World Bank\Nsort of perspective the global
Dialogue: 0,0:06:32.92,0:06:37.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,development view and then you see that the\Npopulation of African countries is
Dialogue: 0,0:06:37.84,0:06:43.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,growing more quickly which throws a racial\Nelement into it too and unfortunately
Dialogue: 0,0:06:43.20,0:06:50.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that's how this type of map is used I\Ncan't read this because it's too awful but
Dialogue: 0,0:06:50.37,0:06:55.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but this is sort of the state of rhetoric\Naround population and the public
Dialogue: 0,0:06:55.52,0:07:03.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,discussion and this, the same author 1968\Npretty mainstream is saying this is one
Dialogue: 0,0:07:03.34,0:07:10.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,way to take care of population growth.\N{\i1}laugh{\i0} So you can see it gets bad
Dialogue: 0,0:07:10.07,0:07:17.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,quickly and we need to be involved in\Nactually re-conceptualizing these models
Dialogue: 0,0:07:17.80,0:07:22.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,We can't let there just be a graph like\Nthis, that doesn't include this. We can't
Dialogue: 0,0:07:22.58,0:07:27.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,let there be a map like this that doesn't\Ntalk about the power dynamics between
Dialogue: 0,0:07:27.81,0:07:34.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,countries and the history of racialized\Npolitics. Yeah, here, just a few
Dialogue: 0,0:07:34.69,0:07:41.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,consequences of how population models\Nactually affect the world and then of
Dialogue: 0,0:07:41.09,0:07:46.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course there are there follow-on effects\Nof population anxieties causing other
Dialogue: 0,0:07:46.72,0:07:51.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,political effects. Here's an alternative\Nmodel and this one is a bit more
Dialogue: 0,0:07:51.87,0:07:55.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,interesting I just wanted to paint the\Nstatus quo so that I could I could show
Dialogue: 0,0:07:55.53,0:08:03.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you what the alternative might be. This is\Na model that was actually the first. It
Dialogue: 0,0:08:03.16,0:08:10.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,was only put out a few years ago and it\Nwas the first to combine the idea of
Dialogue: 0,0:08:10.13,0:08:16.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ecological cycles with the\NEarth's carrying capacity ecological
Dialogue: 0,0:08:16.41,0:08:24.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,resource consumption with class conflict.\NIn this case the humans are eating
Dialogue: 0,0:08:24.74,0:08:29.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the planet, the planet slowly regenerates,\Nand the rich are eating the poor.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:29.67,0:08:38.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,This is actually, surprisingly, a\Ncontroversial thing to say.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:38.34,0:08:42.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,That predicts a completely different sort\Nof population trajectory than the United
Dialogue: 0,0:08:42.94,0:08:48.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Nations drafted. The green line here is\Nthe earth's resources, the red line is the
Dialogue: 0,0:08:48.80,0:08:53.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,commoners population and the blue line\Nare the elites. In this case there they're
Dialogue: 0,0:08:53.23,0:08:57.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like a unchecked predator and as soon as\Nthey're introduced they eat all the poor
Dialogue: 0,0:08:57.46,0:09:05.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,people, if you play with this model I have\Nan interactive version online you can
Dialogue: 0,0:09:05.06,0:09:11.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,sorry, this is not my model but I made an\Ninteractive visualization for it that
Dialogue: 0,0:09:11.10,0:09:16.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lets you change the parameters and see\Nwhat happens if you drag the inequality
Dialogue: 0,0:09:16.22,0:09:19.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,control back and forth then you see that\Nyou can get a completely different
Dialogue: 0,0:09:19.76,0:09:29.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,behavior here you get the population\Nskyrocketing and then stabilizing and
Dialogue: 0,0:09:29.60,0:09:32.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that's sort of just the natural thing\Nthat you would do if there's a single
Dialogue: 0,0:09:32.81,0:09:37.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,predator-prey cycle and and you're you\Nknow you're just rabbits eating grass for
Dialogue: 0,0:09:37.55,0:09:43.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,example I don't think there's time for a\Ntour right now unfortunately but it might
Dialogue: 0,0:09:43.08,0:09:48.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,be fun for you. The point I wanted to\Nmake though that with this second
Dialogue: 0,0:09:48.80,0:09:53.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,predator-prey cycle between rich and\Npoor people, you're actually introducing
Dialogue: 0,0:09:53.00,0:09:59.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Marxism into the formula. This has\Nbeen used to explain capitalism's
Dialogue: 0,0:09:59.48,0:10:05.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,periodic crises which capitalism still\Nwon't admit exist, interestingly enough,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:05.48,0:10:10.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,capitalism says there's always some\Nexternal driver behind the crises but yeah
Dialogue: 0,0:10:10.58,0:10:14.95,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,so if you take this assumption in the\Nformula and you say capitalism does cause
Dialogue: 0,0:10:14.95,0:10:20.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,periodic crises and rich people are\Nacting like predators what do you do ?
Dialogue: 0,0:10:20.54,0:10:28.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,You need class struggle, you need\Nto create more equality. So this is
Dialogue: 0,0:10:28.54,0:10:34.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,just another example of how we\Nshould try to be involved in the
Dialogue: 0,0:10:34.11,0:10:39.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,construction of these models and their use\Nin our world. Labor supply is also very
Dialogue: 0,0:10:39.88,0:10:44.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important but maybe not as interesting.\NDon't worry about this ! I tried to not
Dialogue: 0,0:10:44.58,0:10:49.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,include math because part of the point\Nhere is to make these ideas accessible
Dialogue: 0,0:10:49.43,0:10:55.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,with or without math but I did want this\Npicture up here just to show that in the
Dialogue: 0,0:10:55.48,0:11:02.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,dominant form, in the dominant\Nneoclassical economic perspective if you
Dialogue: 0,0:11:02.37,0:11:08.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,pay people too much they stop working and\Nif so you want to pay them just little
Dialogue: 0,0:11:08.24,0:11:13.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,enough that they work as much as they\Npossibly can and there are all types of a
Dialogue: 0,0:11:13.89,0:11:18.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,crazy assumptions built into these\Nformulas like humans are able to make
Dialogue: 0,0:11:18.31,0:11:23.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,rational choices rather than just taking\Nthe next job in desperation I've never
Dialogue: 0,0:11:23.91,0:11:29.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lived in this world I've only lived in\Nmaybe this world where I want to fight
Dialogue: 0,0:11:29.35,0:11:33.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,back against this formula as much as I can\Nsorry I'll let you read this if you want
Dialogue: 0,0:11:33.54,0:11:40.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but yeah this formula is missing all of\Nthe things that relate to my working world
Dialogue: 0,0:11:40.25,0:11:46.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like my motivation for working is not\Njust consumption of things. There's
Dialogue: 0,0:11:46.10,0:11:50.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,essential survival and then there's\Nwanting to be motivated by contributing to
Dialogue: 0,0:11:50.44,0:11:55.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the world somehow there's organized labor\Nwhich i think about pretty often and most
Dialogue: 0,0:11:55.48,0:12:01.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,jobs that would be another way out of\Nthis formula and you can see the effects
Dialogue: 0,0:12:01.99,0:12:05.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of this type of policy are that the\Nrichest 5% keep getting richer and
Dialogue: 0,0:12:05.97,0:12:16.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,everyone else stays the same. More effects\Nof the neoclassical labor supply and then
Dialogue: 0,0:12:16.82,0:12:20.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is sort of more active I don't\Nthink there are a ton of people working on
Dialogue: 0,0:12:20.94,0:12:27.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this but I'd like to just go through the\Nquestion anyway. Wikipedia has never had
Dialogue: 0,0:12:27.65,0:12:36.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,paid advertisements and it's valuable\Nbecause people visit it extremely often
Dialogue: 0,0:12:36.24,0:12:42.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and trust it, based on its reputation.\NSo if you put advertisements on here
Dialogue: 0,0:12:42.04,0:12:46.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,people this is sort of, like this would be\Nthe holy grail for most advertisers! It
Dialogue: 0,0:12:46.53,0:12:50.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,would be that you would have your product\Nadvertised on top of something that people
Dialogue: 0,0:12:50.76,0:12:57.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already believed so their skepticism\Nwould be much lower there was actually a
Dialogue: 0,0:12:57.91,0:13:02.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,discussion about putting paid\Nadvertisements on Wikipedia in 2001
Dialogue: 0,0:13:02.43,0:13:11.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,little-known fact Wikipedia was started\Nas part of a porn company Bomis and the
Dialogue: 0,0:13:11.21,0:13:15.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the chief of this porn company Jamie\NWales said that there would be paid
Dialogue: 0,0:13:15.02,0:13:19.92,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,advertising on Wikipedia caused a huge\Nfight a Spanish Wikipedia split off and
Dialogue: 0,0:13:19.92,0:13:26.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,formed the Encyclopedia Libre Universal I\Nthink it's called and pretty much because
Dialogue: 0,0:13:26.80,0:13:31.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of this fork Wikipedia was then forced\Ninto not having paid advertisements and
Dialogue: 0,0:13:31.62,0:13:37.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,split off from Bomis when we do have\Nadvertising on Wikipedia which brings in
Dialogue: 0,0:13:37.91,0:13:42.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,money it's basically just two relentless\Nstream of money and we have to
Dialogue: 0,0:13:42.69,0:13:48.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,turn it off to not raise too much and \NSo here's the extremely materialistic
Dialogue: 0,0:13:48.45,0:13:56.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,view of what could be done with Wikipedia\Nwe have 244 billion page views per year
Dialogue: 0,0:13:56.60,0:14:01.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,We could put in for advertising slots \Nthis is a industry standard number
Dialogue: 0,0:14:01.44,0:14:05.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in fact I think it's four per page so as\Nyou scroll there would be more and more
Dialogue: 0,0:14:05.37,0:14:10.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ads and then at this price we could bring\Nin almost three billion dollars a year
Dialogue: 0,0:14:10.30,0:14:16.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,which is a huge profit margin at the low\Noperating cost of 100 million. If you
Dialogue: 0,0:14:16.30,0:14:22.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,create this type of formula then you\Nhave Wikipedia suddenly becomes and
Dialogue: 0,0:14:22.41,0:14:25.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,something that you can buy and sell, it\Nbecomes something that corporations would
Dialogue: 0,0:14:25.80,0:14:32.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,want to take over and control the content\Nof it's obviously soulless. Here's another
Dialogue: 0,0:14:32.60,0:14:37.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,view of advertising on Wikipedia. Who\Ncreates the value in Wikipedia? The
Dialogue: 0,0:14:37.91,0:14:42.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,editors do. Who's allowed to run the\Nfundraising campaigns only three
Dialogue: 0,0:14:42.22,0:14:46.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,organizations actually my employer\NWikimedia Deutschland, Wikimedia
Dialogue: 0,0:14:46.69,0:14:51.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Switzerland and the Wikimedia Foundation,\Nwhich interestingly enough is the one
Dialogue: 0,0:14:51.77,0:14:57.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,organization in the group of Wikipedia\Nchapters, it's the one organization which
Dialogue: 0,0:14:57.94,0:15:03.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is not democratically controlled. It's a\Nself-perpetuating board and this
Dialogue: 0,0:15:03.55,0:15:11.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,charismatic porn leader, Jimmy Wales (I\Nhope this is recorded) he's still the some
Dialogue: 0,0:15:11.19,0:15:17.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,kind of honorary chair of the board he\Nhas a renewable membership for life and
Dialogue: 0,0:15:17.66,0:15:23.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the board members appoint themselves yeah\Nso why are they allowed to be the only
Dialogue: 0,0:15:23.02,0:15:27.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ones raising money through Wikipedia\Nbecause they own the trademarks so it's a
Dialogue: 0,0:15:27.46,0:15:30.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,pretty typical arrangement when it comes\Ndown to it and there's some kind of power
Dialogue: 0,0:15:30.99,0:15:37.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,sharing deal that although I know about it\Nand I was close to people who do
Dialogue: 0,0:15:37.94,0:15:43.92,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,understand it I never learned what's in\Nthere so I can't tell you much about it.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:43.92,0:15:47.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So if you follow this train of logic then\Nyou can come up with another set of
Dialogue: 0,0:15:47.69,0:15:53.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,formulas which is actually the flow of\Nvalue around Wikipedia and its content and
Dialogue: 0,0:15:53.51,0:15:57.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if we did that we might be able to say\Nhey there's there's an excellent argument
Dialogue: 0,0:15:57.38,0:16:03.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for having democratic control of the\Nresources and then more along those lines
Dialogue: 0,0:16:03.11,0:16:07.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if you take the same problem domain and\Nyou and you come up with different
Dialogue: 0,0:16:07.45,0:16:12.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,formulas inside of it you can you can do\Nthings like say what would editors like
Dialogue: 0,0:16:12.39,0:16:18.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from this system that exists to post\Nadvertisements which does exist by the way
Dialogue: 0,0:16:18.18,0:16:23.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if they're just not paid advertisements\Neditors might want a better way of sharing
Dialogue: 0,0:16:23.16,0:16:29.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the resources among themselves. They\Nobviously would fight tooth and nail to
Dialogue: 0,0:16:29.01,0:16:34.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,prevent paid advertising from ever being\Non there but they do want each other they
Dialogue: 0,0:16:34.43,0:16:37.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,want each other's campaigns to be more\Neffective so that we're not constantly
Dialogue: 0,0:16:37.67,0:16:45.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,showing banners with no return I also\Nwanted to point to this paper which is
Dialogue: 0,0:16:45.30,0:16:49.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the one that caused me the anxiety at the\Nbeginning of the talk protective
Dialogue: 0,0:16:49.37,0:16:53.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,optimization technologies and I would\Nlove for you all to click it because it's
Dialogue: 0,0:16:53.94,0:16:59.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's another it's it's like a formal\Nperspective of looking beyond the
Dialogue: 0,0:16:59.30,0:17:04.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,algorithm at the entire system that the\Nalgorithm is embedded in the slides are
Dialogue: 0,0:17:04.45,0:17:09.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,attached to the talk link if you want\Nthat's all I have does anybody feel like
Dialogue: 0,0:17:09.02,0:17:28.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,asking questions? Extremely brave people\Nwant to ask questions?
Dialogue: 0,0:17:28.53,0:17:32.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Question: Hi so I was five minutes late\Nbut perhaps do you have more examples on
Dialogue: 0,0:17:32.56,0:17:40.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,how you see some kind of a political not\Ntwist but like background when you see
Dialogue: 0,0:17:40.33,0:17:46.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,graphs or statistics? Do you have any more\Nexamples when you see that happened how
Dialogue: 0,0:17:46.20,0:17:49.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,do you detect this when you're a beginner\Nand you look at this statistical graph
Dialogue: 0,0:17:49.96,0:17:57.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,how can you analyze it and find out what\Nthe political background or like missing
Dialogue: 0,0:17:57.64,0:18:01.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,preconceptions are?\NAdam: Thanks I wish I'd prepared a few
Dialogue: 0,0:18:01.87,0:18:09.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more and I'm just doing this from\Nan armchair also I my day job is just in
Dialogue: 0,0:18:09.79,0:18:13.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,programming and so the only reason I\Nthink about this stuff is because I'm I
Dialogue: 0,0:18:13.67,0:18:18.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have spent a long time working for evil\Ncompanies unfortunately, and so I'm
Dialogue: 0,0:18:18.85,0:18:22.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,always trying to second-guess what the\Ncompany is actually doing and, but
Dialogue: 0,0:18:22.71,0:18:28.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to do that there's no real trick that I\Ncan think of it's really just the Chomsky
Dialogue: 0,0:18:28.03,0:18:31.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,approach would be: follow the money!\NWhere does the money come from? Where does
Dialogue: 0,0:18:31.65,0:18:36.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it go ? Why do people want this to\Nexist ? And so you have some formula,
Dialogue: 0,0:18:36.70,0:18:49.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,some system if you have one in mind,\Nplease suggest it! And then, yeah,
Dialogue: 0,0:18:49.12,0:18:52.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there's the thing that you could do like\Nliterature review where you you just look
Dialogue: 0,0:18:52.97,0:18:57.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,at similar attempts to look at that same\Nproblem domain and find what people have
Dialogue: 0,0:18:57.50,0:19:01.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,left out of the one that you're looking\Nat but but I don't think there's the
Dialogue: 0,0:19:01.28,0:19:06.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,concrete system to do it because that that\Nwould like allow you to invent everything
Dialogue: 0,0:19:06.29,0:19:17.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the world so it's kind of case-by-case\Nas far as I can tell sorry.
Dialogue: 0,0:19:17.76,0:19:23.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Question: And if you were Jimmy Wales back\Nin the day and you would be setup like a
Dialogue: 0,0:19:23.54,0:19:30.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,benevolent dictator for life, how would\Nyou have faced yourself out? How would be
Dialogue: 0,0:19:30.87,0:19:38.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,your take on? What should be the\Ncorrect way or correct way of Wikipedia
Dialogue: 0,0:19:38.89,0:19:47.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,raising for example funds if in the end\Nthe people who create value are editors?
Dialogue: 0,0:19:47.06,0:19:51.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Adam: When Wikipedia was first started it\Nwas officially a membership organization
Dialogue: 0,0:19:51.34,0:19:56.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and so everybody who is editing or\Nuploading files or changing the source
Dialogue: 0,0:19:56.72,0:20:02.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,code was considered a member in Germany\Nit's a Verein I think and so everybody was
Dialogue: 0,0:20:02.47,0:20:06.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,supposed to have one vote for the board\Nof trustees and that pretty much takes
Dialogue: 0,0:20:06.49,0:20:11.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,care of the problem right there if you\Ndon't in Wikimedia foundation was
Dialogue: 0,0:20:11.15,0:20:17.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,illegally changed to be a non membership\Norganization a few years in and actually
Dialogue: 0,0:20:17.59,0:20:20.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it was illegal because they didn't\Nannounce it to the people who were
Dialogue: 0,0:20:20.26,0:20:30.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,technically members so I suppose editors\Nwould should feel free to sue the
Dialogue: 0,0:20:30.75,0:20:35.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Wikimedia Foundation for control for\Nexample there's no statute of limitations
Dialogue: 0,0:20:35.91,0:20:40.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,on this particular thing that happened\Nbut in general I would say from my
Dialogue: 0,0:20:40.78,0:20:46.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,tiny bit of experience doing grassroots\Norganizing an organization is something
Dialogue: 0,0:20:46.16,0:20:51.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like a child it's you don't want to have\Nit live in your house its whole life and
Dialogue: 0,0:20:51.11,0:20:55.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you don't want to be telling it to get up\Nand brush its teeth in the morning
Dialogue: 0,0:20:55.89,0:21:00.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the measure of success should be\Nsomething more like it takes a life of its
Dialogue: 0,0:21:00.09,0:21:03.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,own it might be direction you didn't\Nconsider and so to do that you have to
Dialogue: 0,0:21:03.94,0:21:17.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,devolve the power from yourself. Does that\Nanswer the question? Okay all right well
Dialogue: 0,0:21:17.08,0:21:19.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,thank you so much for coming\NI hope it was useful.
Dialogue: 0,0:21:19.60,0:21:24.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}postroll music{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:21:24.72,0:21:48.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,subtitles created by c3subtitles.de\Nin the year 2020. Join, and help us!