0:00:05.898,0:00:08.180
Hello. Just to check.

0:00:08.180,0:00:09.839
Can everyone hear me?

0:00:09.839,0:00:11.591
Grand.[br]I've never understood

0:00:11.591,0:00:13.640
why that's such a phenomenon[br]when people give talks

0:00:13.640,0:00:16.600
because if you can't,[br]what are you meant to say?

0:00:16.600,0:00:17.860
(laughter)

0:00:18.452,0:00:21.170
But yes, so as said, I'm Os.

0:00:21.170,0:00:24.333
I'm a PhD student[br]at the University of Washington,

0:00:24.333,0:00:26.250
where, according to the slide,

0:00:26.250,0:00:29.818
I study "Gender, Infrastructure[br]and (Counter)Power."

0:00:30.130,0:00:32.556
I'd ask you all to do me the indulgence[br]of pretending that

0:00:32.556,0:00:37.448
that's some very explicit, nuanced,[br]thoughtful, academic description

0:00:37.448,0:00:39.356
and not just what I write as a catch-all,

0:00:39.356,0:00:42.385
because I kind of study[br]a thousand different things

0:00:42.385,0:00:45.916
and fitting them all [br]into a few words is hard.

0:00:46.694,0:00:48.290
But most of the things I study

0:00:48.290,0:00:52.309
are around how systems[br]of knowledge enforce particular ideas

0:00:52.309,0:00:53.823
of how the world works,

0:00:53.823,0:00:55.857
and particular relationships of power

0:00:55.857,0:00:58.270
with a specific focus on gender.

0:00:58.922,0:01:00.656
I'm also an ex-Wikipedian.

0:01:00.656,0:01:02.657
I spent 15 years as an editor

0:01:02.657,0:01:05.904
which is maybe where my interest[br]in the nature of knowledge started,

0:01:06.754,0:01:10.274
and I really can't express[br]how happy I was to be invited

0:01:10.274,0:01:13.392
and how glad I am to be here[br]with all of you,

0:01:13.392,0:01:14.896
but particularly James Forrester

0:01:14.896,0:01:16.761
who is probably the only person qualified

0:01:16.761,0:01:19.630
to countersign [br]my passport renewal application,

0:01:20.609,0:01:23.190
cause it's running out soon[br]and I've been trying to work out...

0:01:23.190,0:01:24.326
(laughter)

0:01:24.326,0:01:26.205
You move to Seattle.[br]Everything is great.

0:01:26.205,0:01:27.771
Then you're like,[br]"Oh, the UK government

0:01:27.771,0:01:31.730
requires me to find an ex-priest,[br]civil servant, or member of parliament,

0:01:31.730,0:01:33.454
who's known me for at least 2 years

0:01:33.454,0:01:35.005
and who I can ship paperwork to."

0:01:35.005,0:01:36.569
That sounds plausible.

0:01:36.569,0:01:38.440
(laughter)

0:01:38.440,0:01:40.189
Anyway, but...

0:01:40.189,0:01:43.874
So I'm here as someone[br]who has spent a lot of time of...

0:01:45.100,0:01:46.137
a number of years--

0:01:46.137,0:01:49.315
which I don't like to think about[br]because it makes me feel incredibly old--

0:01:49.315,0:01:51.548
wrestling with the nature of knowledge

0:01:51.548,0:01:53.456
and the idea of knowledge--

0:01:53.456,0:01:55.324
to talk to you about

0:01:55.324,0:01:57.372
what Wikidata looks like

0:01:57.372,0:02:01.245
to someone from my background[br]and with my research interests.

0:02:02.433,0:02:05.160
And I'm not going to spend much time[br]on the story of Wikidata itself,

0:02:05.160,0:02:08.431
because if you're here, [br]having spent 24 hours

0:02:08.431,0:02:10.230
having it brain dumped into you,

0:02:10.230,0:02:11.720
you're familiar with it.

0:02:11.720,0:02:13.217
It's a big semantic data store

0:02:13.217,0:02:15.144
that aims to provide[br]machine-readable knowledge

0:02:15.144,0:02:16.939
in a centralized way.

0:02:16.939,0:02:21.133
And what this looks like[br]is a series of items

0:02:21.133,0:02:23.558
with associated properties or statements.

0:02:23.558,0:02:26.840
So the item for "apple"[br]has the property "fruit."

0:02:26.840,0:02:28.220
I mean, probably.

0:02:28.220,0:02:31.454
It's a Wiki so there's probably[br]a long-running edit war

0:02:31.454,0:02:32.994
of whether an apple is a fruit,

0:02:32.994,0:02:36.160
and there's 50 people [br]running 300 accounts between them,

0:02:36.160,0:02:37.670
and it's been going for years,

0:02:37.670,0:02:41.010
and at this point,[br]if you mention the word apple on Wikidata,

0:02:41.010,0:02:44.645
you're preemptively banned[br]as someone who, you know,

0:02:44.645,0:02:46.104
is secretly a sock puppet

0:02:46.104,0:02:48.753
and running an account on one [br]or another side of this.

0:02:50.247,0:02:51.941
So as a consequence,

0:02:51.941,0:02:54.229
it's also a classification system, right?

0:02:54.229,0:02:56.717
A way of sorting and organizing the world.

0:02:57.123,0:03:00.070
So, objects or people or concepts

0:03:00.070,0:03:03.665
are classified as worth[br]having a Wikidata entry or not.

0:03:03.665,0:03:05.186
A fruit or not.

0:03:05.580,0:03:06.620
And in each case

0:03:06.620,0:03:08.325
a series of criterion apply

0:03:08.325,0:03:10.782
to determine the properties[br]that an object should have,

0:03:10.782,0:03:12.619
and the values of these properties

0:03:12.619,0:03:15.225
and how the objects [br]all relate to each other.

0:03:15.225,0:03:17.776
So Wikidata is really an attempt to build

0:03:17.776,0:03:20.378
a universal classification system.

0:03:21.912,0:03:25.983
And classification systems[br]have been studied pretty extensively.

0:03:25.983,0:03:28.963
One prominent work[br]which I'd really recommend people read

0:03:28.963,0:03:32.382
if they're interested in this stuff[br]is <i>Sorting Things Out,</i>

0:03:32.382,0:03:35.513
which is book by Geoff Bowker[br]and Susan Leigh Star.

0:03:36.332,0:03:38.555
And they found that[br]in an ideal universe,

0:03:38.555,0:03:41.062
a classification system,

0:03:41.062,0:03:44.300
be it universal[br]or over a particular domain,

0:03:44.300,0:03:46.099
has three attributes.

0:03:46.099,0:03:49.987
The first is it operates on consistent[br]and unique principles.

0:03:49.987,0:03:51.652
So, there's a consistent pattern

0:03:51.652,0:03:55.252
of what should be in each category[br]and for what reasons.

0:03:55.557,0:03:59.224
The second is all the categories[br]are mutually exclusive.

0:03:59.224,0:04:02.060
And the third is [br]that the system is complete.

0:04:02.060,0:04:04.566
It contains total coverage of[br]what it describes.

0:04:04.566,0:04:06.989
And this doesn't mean[br]it has to have every single object

0:04:06.989,0:04:08.975
that fits into the system.

0:04:08.975,0:04:10.861
It just means that in the situation

0:04:10.861,0:04:13.233
where it lacks an object

0:04:13.233,0:04:14.827
and that object then shows up,

0:04:14.827,0:04:16.433
there should be[br]a consistent mechanism

0:04:16.433,0:04:19.090
to work out[br]whether it should be added or not,

0:04:19.090,0:04:20.605
and how it should be described

0:04:20.605,0:04:22.114
and so on, and so forth.

0:04:22.699,0:04:25.835
There is one small problem[br]with this which is that:

0:04:26.685,0:04:29.315
"No real-world[br]working classification system

0:04:29.315,0:04:31.575
that we have looked at[br]meets these simple requirements

0:04:31.575,0:04:33.332
and we doubt that any ever could."

0:04:34.002,0:04:35.274
Or to put it another way,

0:04:35.274,0:04:37.321
all classification systems fail.

0:04:37.760,0:04:41.208
All classification systems[br]have gaps and exceptions.

0:04:42.068,0:04:45.186
And obviously, the same is true[br]for all systems, full stop.

0:04:45.186,0:04:47.146
Anyone who has ever coded

0:04:47.146,0:04:49.317
or simply worked in an environment,

0:04:49.317,0:04:51.672
or studied in an environment,[br]or lived in the world

0:04:51.672,0:04:54.720
knows that we've yet[br]to design a single thing

0:04:54.720,0:04:57.669
that we've thought all the way through.

0:04:57.929,0:05:00.365
The problem is that when we take a system,

0:05:00.365,0:05:01.894
classification, or otherwise,

0:05:01.894,0:05:03.199
and put it out into the world

0:05:03.199,0:05:07.314
and give it power and authority,[br]and integrate it into other systems,

0:05:07.314,0:05:09.329
that already have power[br]and authority,

0:05:09.329,0:05:11.373
there are consequences [br]for what happens

0:05:11.373,0:05:13.769
when the system inevitably fails,

0:05:14.657,0:05:20.189
for how it reinforces or undermines[br]existing relationships of power,

0:05:20.189,0:05:21.970
for how it hurts people.

0:05:22.370,0:05:25.111
A universal classification system is,[br]in another words,

0:05:25.111,0:05:28.952
not merely doomed to failure,[br]it's also doomed to hurt people.

0:05:30.083,0:05:32.352
And the way that it is structured

0:05:32.352,0:05:37.052
is ultimately a series of ethical[br]and political choices as a result--

0:05:37.585,0:05:39.417
Who do you want to hurt?[br]How much?

0:05:39.417,0:05:41.839
What should be done[br]when people are injured?

0:05:42.197,0:05:45.166
And those choices have real consequences.

0:05:48.292,0:05:51.602
And so making these choices[br]often involves confronting the fact

0:05:51.602,0:05:53.733
that there's very rarely a single

0:05:53.733,0:05:55.551
simple machine-readable interpretation

0:05:55.551,0:05:58.698
of something that's true[br]for all people throughout all history.

0:05:58.698,0:05:59.966
Anything in the universe

0:05:59.966,0:06:03.135
has multiple meanings,[br]and symbolisms, and nuances

0:06:03.135,0:06:07.077
to different people in different contexts[br]at different times.

0:06:07.270,0:06:10.119
But designing a classification system[br]and implementing it,

0:06:10.119,0:06:11.952
designing a system that can make a claim

0:06:11.952,0:06:14.557
to having consistent principles,

0:06:14.557,0:06:17.358
and covering everything it discusses,

0:06:17.358,0:06:21.148
inevitably involves[br]cutting down on this complexity

0:06:21.148,0:06:25.045
and making decisions about what[br]"the" meaning of a thing is going to be,

0:06:25.045,0:06:26.860
or what array of possible meaning

0:06:26.860,0:06:29.659
should be presented[br]and in what sequence.

0:06:30.770,0:06:31.820
And as a result,

0:06:31.820,0:06:35.690
it involves silencing voices[br]or rendering voices louder.

0:06:35.984,0:06:37.879
Again, this has consequences.

0:06:37.879,0:06:40.263
And to see what I mean[br]about this complexity

0:06:40.263,0:06:43.855
and context, and reduction,[br]and the consequences of it,

0:06:44.174,0:06:47.370
I'd like to set through some examples[br]from Wikidata itself.

0:06:47.640,0:06:50.368
The ones I've chosen [br]are all gender-related because again,

0:06:50.368,0:06:54.305
gender is both professionally[br]and personally sort of a key interest.

0:06:55.360,0:06:58.837
So, the first that I'll start with[br]is transexualism

0:06:58.837,0:07:00.506
which is described as a "condition

0:07:00.506,0:07:02.956
in which an individual[br]identifies with a gender

0:07:02.956,0:07:06.966
inconsistent or not culturally associated [br]with their biological sex."

0:07:08.458,0:07:10.136
Fairly unobjectionable and--

0:07:10.136,0:07:12.306
wait, no, it's classified as a disease,

0:07:12.306,0:07:15.271
and a psychiatric disease at that.

0:07:15.833,0:07:18.657
Now, I know what you're thinking,[br]which is this is appalling

0:07:18.657,0:07:20.462
but actually it's not as simple

0:07:20.462,0:07:24.340
as either of these statements[br]being true or false, right?

0:07:25.094,0:07:27.753
They're in a category of sort of,[br]"true, except."

0:07:28.539,0:07:33.194
So, take transsexualism[br]is an instance of disease, right?

0:07:33.374,0:07:35.680
Technically, this is true,

0:07:35.680,0:07:37.939
in so far as transsexualism

0:07:37.939,0:07:39.228
is the name of an entry

0:07:39.228,0:07:42.428
under the International Classification[br]of Diseases, version 10.

0:07:43.070,0:07:45.692
But we should add some complexity[br]and nuance to that.

0:07:45.692,0:07:51.160
So, the ICD[br]is a classification of literally

0:07:51.160,0:07:53.623
everything in the world [br]that you could have

0:07:53.623,0:07:57.929
that was in any way involved at all[br]in someone's injury or death.

0:07:58.336,0:08:02.647
It is in fact illegal to die of something[br]that is not listed in the ICD.

0:08:02.647,0:08:04.212
(laughter)

0:08:04.958,0:08:07.125
So it contains kind of a lot of things,

0:08:07.125,0:08:09.071
and transexualism is listed in it

0:08:09.071,0:08:10.534
so we classify it as a disease

0:08:10.534,0:08:13.674
because it's in a classification[br]of diseases.

0:08:13.674,0:08:16.864
So, here are some other things[br]that the ICD also lists as diseases

0:08:16.864,0:08:19.400
that it has specific entries for.

0:08:20.079,0:08:22.995
PA80: Shot by accident.

0:08:24.166,0:08:28.363
PA40.0: Fell off a boat, drowned.

0:08:28.363,0:08:29.887
(laughter)

0:08:30.162,0:08:35.106
PA41.1: Fell off a boat,[br]damaged the boat, and drowned.

0:08:35.106,0:08:36.798
(laughter)

0:08:37.210,0:08:39.975
PA40.1: Fell off the boat,

0:08:39.975,0:08:41.380
didn't damage the boat,

0:08:41.380,0:08:42.598
didn't drown,

0:08:42.598,0:08:44.050
still died of something.

0:08:44.050,0:08:45.386
(laughter)

0:08:45.732,0:08:48.793
And finally, QD50: Being poor.

0:08:48.793,0:08:50.111
(laughter)

0:08:50.439,0:08:53.668
So, if any of you[br]have ever fallen off a boat,

0:08:53.668,0:08:57.186
I'm very sorry but you have a disease

0:08:57.186,0:08:59.265
which you should really [br]talk to a doctor about.

0:08:59.265,0:09:01.207
What class of doctor, [br]I'm not sure.

0:09:01.207,0:09:03.134
It might be a psychiatrist.

0:09:03.134,0:09:04.510
Who knows?

0:09:05.713,0:09:07.797
So you know that's disease, right?

0:09:07.797,0:09:10.522
What about health specialty: psychiatry?

0:09:10.522,0:09:13.703
Well, that's also true, sort of.

0:09:13.703,0:09:15.595
So, psychiatrists are the people

0:09:15.595,0:09:18.748
who diagnose the presence[br]of gender dysphoria,

0:09:18.748,0:09:21.074
a disconnect between one's sense of gender

0:09:21.074,0:09:24.184
and one's sort of like,[br]embodied or perceived gender.

0:09:24.530,0:09:26.032
But again, context.

0:09:26.032,0:09:29.048
For example, [br]saying psychiatrists diagnose it

0:09:29.048,0:09:30.970
ignores the fact [br]that none of the treatments

0:09:30.970,0:09:32.329
are psychiatric.

0:09:32.329,0:09:34.052
You might as well list the specialties

0:09:34.052,0:09:38.328
as specialization in hormones

0:09:38.328,0:09:41.798
or plastic surgery,[br]or being a personal shopper.

0:09:42.118,0:09:45.664
All of these also have some role[br]in people's life trajectories.

0:09:46.042,0:09:47.874
They are not listed.

0:09:49.605,0:09:51.704
One other useful [br]potential factoid by the way,

0:09:51.704,0:09:54.201
is that the ICD 10 is actually

0:09:54.201,0:09:57.477
the old International Classification[br]of Diseases,

0:09:57.477,0:10:01.446
and the ICD 11 no longer lists [br]transsexualism at all,

0:10:01.446,0:10:03.512
much less as a disease.

0:10:04.222,0:10:08.297
But my point here is not that Wikidata[br]sometimes contains outdated information

0:10:08.297,0:10:10.512
or sometimes contains[br]false information,

0:10:10.512,0:10:14.481
it's that the statements [br]that are constructed from that information

0:10:14.481,0:10:16.873
as a consequence of what they leave out

0:10:16.873,0:10:18.213
and what the results are,

0:10:18.213,0:10:20.524
drop things and add risk.

0:10:21.418,0:10:23.132
So, one way of structuring

0:10:23.132,0:10:25.478
the information that[br]that entry contained is:

0:10:25.478,0:10:29.545
"transsexualism is a psychiatric disease."

0:10:29.545,0:10:31.511
And this leaves out [br]a lot of complexity,

0:10:31.511,0:10:33.543
some of which we've discussed.

0:10:33.543,0:10:36.178
But the greater issue is how it interlocks

0:10:36.178,0:10:39.751
and resonates with existing narratives,[br]and existing information.

0:10:40.161,0:10:43.340
For example, the idea[br]of transsexualism is a disease.

0:10:43.340,0:10:48.478
Does anyone know why [br]the ICD stops listing it as a disease?

0:10:49.830,0:10:51.343
Well, two reasons.

0:10:51.343,0:10:55.779
First is because calling[br]being trans a disease is not accurate.

0:10:55.779,0:10:58.698
It does not meet the definition[br]of being a disease.

0:10:59.932,0:11:02.763
In fact, the only reason[br]that anything to do with being trans

0:11:02.763,0:11:07.761
is still in the ICD is not[br]out of some objective

0:11:07.761,0:11:11.685
like, you know, examination[br]of biology or psychiatry

0:11:11.685,0:11:13.928
but instead purely pragmatism.

0:11:14.126,0:11:15.676
That if you stop listing it,

0:11:15.676,0:11:18.453
then insurance companies[br]in places like the U.S.

0:11:18.453,0:11:20.969
would stop covering medical care

0:11:20.969,0:11:23.787
that is associated with being trans.

0:11:24.257,0:11:25.787
And the second is that

0:11:27.077,0:11:30.335
the stigma associated [br]with having something classified

0:11:30.335,0:11:32.761
as a disease is substantive,

0:11:33.014,0:11:35.514
and when you list transsexualism[br]as a disease

0:11:35.514,0:11:37.038
and a psychiatric one at that,

0:11:37.038,0:11:39.373
you tap into really[br]long-standing assumptions

0:11:39.373,0:11:41.685
and false beliefs about trans people.

0:11:41.685,0:11:43.865
Assumptions and beliefs[br]that have a lot of power.

0:11:43.865,0:11:46.753
Like, if it's a disease[br]there must be something wrong

0:11:46.753,0:11:49.601
with trans people,[br]something that people should fix.

0:11:49.896,0:11:51.487
And if it's a psychiatric condition

0:11:51.487,0:11:54.740
then trans people should[br]be therapized out of being trans.

0:11:54.740,0:11:59.150
In other words, whatever the raw truth[br]or falseness of the statement,

0:11:59.150,0:12:01.930
stripping out its complexity[br]and contextuality,

0:12:01.930,0:12:05.276
lets people fit it into their own notions[br]of what it means.

0:12:06.361,0:12:07.374
And that doesn't end

0:12:07.374,0:12:10.160
in a neutral objective[br]classification system,

0:12:10.160,0:12:13.109
it ends in things like conversion therapy,

0:12:13.109,0:12:17.402
and it being legal[br]to beat people to death for being trans

0:12:17.402,0:12:19.990
when you find out that they're trans [br]after you slept with them,

0:12:19.990,0:12:22.061
because, you know, [br]something's wrong with them.

0:12:22.061,0:12:25.917
Like why would you [br]be considered reasonable

0:12:25.917,0:12:27.417
to have done this?

0:12:29.574,0:12:33.375
So a more accurate framing of this [br]might be this,

0:12:33.375,0:12:36.859
which is hard to fit into Wikidata.

0:12:37.673,0:12:40.573
And because we can't fit [br]that into Wikidata,

0:12:40.573,0:12:41.780
and we strip it down,

0:12:41.780,0:12:43.077
and we lose all that complexity,

0:12:43.077,0:12:47.943
we open up the possibility to, again, [br]reinforce these really dangerous notions.

0:12:49.652,0:12:52.082
So, let's look at another example,[br]also from gender,

0:12:52.082,0:12:54.441
and that is the entry for non-binary.

0:12:55.592,0:12:58.360
So, as Wikidata informs us,

0:12:58.360,0:13:00.505
non-binary is a range of genders

0:13:00.505,0:13:03.420
that are neither exclusively man [br]nor woman.

0:13:03.420,0:13:07.062
And there are some critiques [br]I have of the "also known as" section,

0:13:07.062,0:13:08.616
but that's not the biggest issue here.

0:13:08.616,0:13:10.068
No, the biggest issue here

0:13:10.068,0:13:14.800
is that at no point does this entire page[br]make any reference to trans people.

0:13:14.970,0:13:18.972
So, if you go to the entry[br]for transgender woman,

0:13:18.972,0:13:22.064
it says, "opposite to transgender man."

0:13:22.243,0:13:24.093
And if you go to the entry[br]for transgender man

0:13:24.093,0:13:26.542
it says, "opposite to transgender woman."

0:13:26.916,0:13:28.640
If you go to this entry,

0:13:28.998,0:13:32.982
it has absolutely no reference[br]to trans people whatsoever.

0:13:32.982,0:13:36.106
There is this complete disconnect[br]and distinction

0:13:36.106,0:13:39.331
between non-binary people[br]and trans people.

0:13:40.327,0:13:42.324
And this might be, seems to be,

0:13:42.324,0:13:44.432
a pedantic thing to be concerned about

0:13:44.432,0:13:47.627
but it's actually a really useful example[br]for a couple of reasons.

0:13:48.285,0:13:52.821
The first is that how non-binary people[br]relates to being trans

0:13:52.821,0:13:54.768
is really hotly debated.

0:13:56.248,0:14:00.478
Individual non-binary people[br]may or may not identify as trans.

0:14:02.170,0:14:03.762
As a consequence, it's really difficult

0:14:03.762,0:14:07.386
to make big categorical judgements[br]about a class of people.

0:14:09.120,0:14:13.207
Other people would say that non-binary[br]people aren't trans,

0:14:13.207,0:14:16.477
for whatever reason,[br]or that non-binary people are trans.

0:14:17.577,0:14:20.093
You know, you have to [br]make a decision at some point.

0:14:20.093,0:14:22.107
How are you going[br]to categorize this entry?

0:14:22.107,0:14:24.288
What attributes are you going[br]to associate it with?

0:14:26.019,0:14:28.047
But it's hard to do that in Wikidata

0:14:28.047,0:14:30.841
when by necessity [br]the structure of the platform

0:14:30.841,0:14:33.070
is so categorical and so fixed,

0:14:33.070,0:14:36.647
that you can't really say like,[br]for some people these things are related

0:14:36.647,0:14:39.592
and for others they aren't,[br]and it's actually very politically charged

0:14:39.592,0:14:41.333
but you should think about it.

0:14:42.473,0:14:44.779
There's no objective fact to fall back on.

0:14:44.779,0:14:48.050
It's very contextual and complex,[br]and disputed.

0:14:50.193,0:14:53.373
So, how do you fit this in?

0:14:53.637,0:14:54.916
Anyone?

0:14:57.530,0:15:00.154
But, this reductiveness[br]isn't just a question of,

0:15:00.154,0:15:02.370
"Oh well, we haven't fit all[br]the information in

0:15:02.370,0:15:04.300
so I guess it's not perfect."

0:15:04.300,0:15:08.790
Again, it fits into preexisting discourses[br]and the preexisting world,

0:15:08.790,0:15:11.436
and has the potential[br]to cause very real harms.

0:15:12.696,0:15:14.180
There's this very long history

0:15:14.180,0:15:17.290
of non-binary people [br]not being considered trans,

0:15:18.178,0:15:20.974
going back to, in fact, the foundational,

0:15:20.974,0:15:24.870
sort of medical and academic, [br]and authoritative works

0:15:24.870,0:15:28.852
on what being trans is[br]and how trans people should be treated.

0:15:29.633,0:15:30.930
And what this has resulted in

0:15:30.930,0:15:35.556
is non-binary people being cut[br]out of access to resources--

0:15:37.094,0:15:41.167
medical care, community membership,[br]any kind of support.

0:15:41.167,0:15:43.861
In fact until 2013,

0:15:43.861,0:15:47.083
being non-binary was not a thing[br]you could possibly be

0:15:47.083,0:15:51.230
while still getting access,[br]to transition-related medical treatment.

0:15:51.230,0:15:54.512
If you were, and you wanted access[br]you would have to go to your doctor

0:15:54.512,0:15:58.203
and consistently lie,[br]and hopefully get away with it.

0:16:00.119,0:16:03.324
So, if you want that diagnosis to happen

0:16:03.324,0:16:05.644
so that your health insurance[br]will cover things

0:16:05.644,0:16:08.738
or that your national health service[br]will cover things,

0:16:08.738,0:16:10.840
you could either be a man[br]or a woman,

0:16:10.840,0:16:12.503
and nothing else.

0:16:13.986,0:16:16.185
And right now there's a ton of backlash

0:16:16.185,0:16:17.730
to non-binary existences

0:16:17.730,0:16:20.459
from people who are thinking[br]that we are a threat,

0:16:20.459,0:16:23.092
or something new and novel

0:16:23.092,0:16:26.758
when we've been around for just[br]as long as any other kind of trans person

0:16:26.758,0:16:29.629
and just not discussed.

0:16:30.623,0:16:32.285
And again, the consequence of this

0:16:32.285,0:16:36.946
is that this silence is reinforcing[br]those preexisting ideas

0:16:36.946,0:16:41.523
of being non-binary has nothing to do[br]with being trans whatsoever,

0:16:41.523,0:16:47.245
and it creates and reinforces discourses[br]that cut people off from care,

0:16:47.245,0:16:49.641
and cut people off from community.

0:16:51.273,0:16:55.653
And finally, before I stop harping[br]on things about gender quite so much,

0:16:56.352,0:16:57.463
the hijra.

0:16:57.463,0:16:59.266
So, according to Wikidata

0:16:59.266,0:17:02.239
the hijra are the third gender[br]of South Asian cultures

0:17:02.239,0:17:04.869
and a sub class of non-binary.

0:17:05.526,0:17:07.258
Now, here's the thing.

0:17:07.258,0:17:11.256
Yes, hijra people fall[br]outside a simple man-woman binary,

0:17:12.430,0:17:14.280
but pretty much zero hijra people

0:17:14.280,0:17:16.236
would ever define themselves [br]as non-binary,

0:17:16.236,0:17:18.790
because it just doesn't make any sense.

0:17:18.790,0:17:22.705
In a western context, [br]non-binary people are, by definition,

0:17:22.705,0:17:24.380
not man or woman

0:17:24.380,0:17:27.844
but as a consequence[br]not trans man or trans woman.

0:17:28.706,0:17:31.180
Hijra includes trans women,

0:17:31.180,0:17:34.160
and also includes all intersex people,

0:17:34.160,0:17:37.682
all sterile people,[br]and a large number of gay people

0:17:37.682,0:17:40.755
while not including trans men

0:17:40.755,0:17:45.422
or people who are non-binary,[br]and were assigned female at birth.

0:17:46.704,0:17:48.042
All of this is really complex

0:17:48.042,0:17:50.057
and there are literally books written

0:17:50.057,0:17:54.578
on the framework of gender[br]and how that fits into it.

0:17:54.578,0:17:56.825
But the point is[br]there's not a simple mapping

0:17:56.825,0:17:58.803
of western gender notions

0:17:58.803,0:18:01.173
to gender notions[br]in the rest of the world.

0:18:02.121,0:18:04.876
Categorizing hijra people

0:18:04.876,0:18:09.791
as a subset of non-binary people

0:18:09.791,0:18:14.026
ignores the fact that most hijra people[br]do not see themselves that way,

0:18:14.026,0:18:15.572
would not see themselves that way,

0:18:15.572,0:18:18.891
and that the definitions of hijra [br]and non-binary

0:18:18.891,0:18:21.047
are completely incompatible.

0:18:22.577,0:18:24.383
But again this has the potential

0:18:24.383,0:18:26.711
to cause harm.

0:18:26.711,0:18:28.231
Because the fact of the matter

0:18:28.231,0:18:31.840
is that western notions of gender[br]are pretty regularly

0:18:31.840,0:18:35.116
and over a long period of time[br]exported to the rest of the world

0:18:35.116,0:18:36.638
often by violence.

0:18:37.261,0:18:39.933
We have these information systems.

0:18:39.933,0:18:42.634
We have classification systems.

0:18:42.634,0:18:43.638
We have standards.

0:18:43.638,0:18:46.648
We have, historically and currently, wars,

0:18:46.648,0:18:49.030
all of which are orientated[br]around this idea

0:18:49.030,0:18:52.047
of the western way of doing things[br]is the only good way

0:18:52.047,0:18:54.306
or is the best way[br]and the standard way,

0:18:54.306,0:18:57.097
and everyone should conform.

0:18:57.097,0:19:00.795
And so when we have these big projects[br]which are trying to fit the world

0:19:00.795,0:19:04.334
in to a very westernized idea[br]of knowledge, because they have to,

0:19:04.334,0:19:07.736
because that’s how classification systems[br]do universally work--

0:19:07.736,0:19:10.533
everything has to fit [br]into one consistent scheme.

0:19:11.396,0:19:13.988
It is perpetuating that kind of violence.

0:19:17.173,0:19:20.510
So, you could respond[br]to my concerns and examples,

0:19:20.510,0:19:22.535
and rambles with kind of a lot.

0:19:22.535,0:19:25.480
One line to take would be,[br]"Why does this matter?"

0:19:25.480,0:19:28.475
Why does Wikidata participating[br]and validating

0:19:28.475,0:19:32.646
or invalidating particular discourses[br]have an impact on the world?

0:19:33.495,0:19:37.126
And the first answer is[br]it actually doesn't matter if it matters.

0:19:37.126,0:19:39.385
It matters that you acknowledge it,

0:19:39.385,0:19:41.874
So, right now the default framing[br]of Wikidata is

0:19:41.874,0:19:45.172
we're just collecting all of the knowledge[br]in a machine-readable form,

0:19:45.172,0:19:46.398
but you're not.

0:19:46.398,0:19:47.598
You're also making decisions

0:19:47.598,0:19:50.124
about what should be included[br]and what shouldn't,

0:19:50.124,0:19:52.973
and how knowledge should be represented.

0:19:52.973,0:19:55.897
What complexity is worth representing[br]and what isn't.

0:19:56.667,0:19:59.330
And those are ethical [br]and political choices,

0:19:59.330,0:20:01.790
and framing the project[br]as simply the result

0:20:01.790,0:20:04.741
of a million anonymous,[br]and interchangeable monkeys

0:20:04.741,0:20:06.748
with an equivalent number of typewriters

0:20:06.748,0:20:09.382
makes it impossible for us[br]to have conversations about it.

0:20:09.833,0:20:13.450
Wikidata's organizers and users[br]and funders must understand

0:20:13.450,0:20:16.877
that they're fundamentally[br]making charged decisions

0:20:16.877,0:20:19.443
that are not neutral[br]or objective at all,

0:20:20.114,0:20:23.972
and that is not bad but dangerous.

0:20:25.991,0:20:28.113
And so, okay, having accepted

0:20:28.113,0:20:30.491
that these are ethical[br]and political decisions,

0:20:30.491,0:20:32.724
you could say,[br]"Well, if people want their takes

0:20:32.724,0:20:35.030
on things included, [br]they should just contribute."

0:20:35.352,0:20:38.900
And marginalized communities[br]do contribute a lot, right?

0:20:38.900,0:20:41.139
There's a long history[br]of queer communities,

0:20:41.139,0:20:44.358
particularly, being[br]very early adopters of technology.

0:20:44.358,0:20:47.848
And so people could[br]just contribute to Wikidata.

0:20:47.848,0:20:53.148
Like Hijra people could create accounts[br]and start arguing

0:20:53.148,0:20:56.260
that actually the entry[br]shouldn't be a subset of non-binary

0:20:56.260,0:20:58.124
and so, and so forth.

0:20:58.874,0:21:01.848
The problem is that [br]this is unlikely to help

0:21:01.848,0:21:03.698
because they're the minority,

0:21:03.698,0:21:05.879
because many of the voices [br]and perspectives

0:21:05.879,0:21:07.539
that are currently silenced,

0:21:07.539,0:21:10.091
in the political and ethical decisions[br]being made,

0:21:10.091,0:21:11.852
are those of minorities.

0:21:11.852,0:21:14.180
So, I did some number crunching on this.

0:21:14.180,0:21:17.163
Wikidata has 20,000 active editors

0:21:17.483,0:21:21.432
from a human population[br]of seven billion give or take,

0:21:21.432,0:21:23.919
unless you believe that maths is a lie

0:21:23.919,0:21:28.436
and the world governments,[br]controlled by lizards under the Arctic,

0:21:28.436,0:21:31.295
is making everything up.

0:21:31.295,0:21:33.159
And there are approximately...[br]Um hmm?

0:21:33.159,0:21:34.329
(person 1) You mean they're not?

0:21:34.329,0:21:35.500
(laughter)

0:21:35.500,0:21:37.413
Look, I'll be honest.

0:21:37.413,0:21:39.177
If living in the U.S.[br]for the last five years

0:21:39.177,0:21:40.236
has taught me anything,

0:21:40.236,0:21:44.622
it's that any government assemblage[br]large enough to try and control

0:21:44.622,0:21:46.414
a big chunk of the human population

0:21:46.414,0:21:50.524
would in no way be consistently competent[br]enough to actually cover it up.

0:21:50.524,0:21:51.553
(laughter)

0:21:51.553,0:21:53.276
Like we would have found out[br]in three months--

0:21:53.276,0:21:54.522
and it wouldn't even have been

0:21:54.522,0:21:57.025
because of some[br]plucky investigative reporter--

0:21:57.025,0:21:58.861
it would have been [br]because one of the lizards

0:21:58.861,0:22:00.497
forgot to put on[br]their human suit one day

0:22:00.497,0:22:02.806
and accidentally went out [br]to the shops for a pint of milk

0:22:02.806,0:22:04.454
(laughter)

0:22:04.454,0:22:07.723
and got caught in a TikTok video.

0:22:07.723,0:22:09.856
(laughter)

0:22:10.880,0:22:13.835
So Wikidata has 20,000 active editors--

0:22:14.497,0:22:16.514
of whom we will assume none are lizards

0:22:16.514,0:22:18.419
in human suits or otherwise--

0:22:18.624,0:22:21.331
from a human population of seven billion,

0:22:21.770,0:22:24.695
and there are approximately[br]one million Hijra people in the world.

0:22:24.695,0:22:27.494
So if we assume a rate[br]of equal participation--

0:22:27.494,0:22:30.892
setting aside the extreme poverty[br]a lot of Hijra people live in

0:22:30.892,0:22:32.245
and the corresponding impact

0:22:32.245,0:22:34.669
on access to things[br]like reliable internet coverage--

0:22:35.788,0:22:40.545
then the combined efforts[br]of 20,000 Wikidata editors

0:22:40.545,0:22:44.393
would have to be overwhelmed[br]by 2.85 people.

0:22:45.881,0:22:48.545
That doesn't seem particularly plausible.

0:22:51.830,0:22:53.425
Okay, so then you might say,

0:22:53.425,0:22:57.109
"Well, what if we just have [br]other Wikibase instances

0:22:57.109,0:22:59.692
isn't that the whole thing[br]we're building towards?

0:22:59.990,0:23:03.234
You can set up your own Wikibase[br]with your own perspectives

0:23:03.234,0:23:05.940
and your own decisions[br]about how to classify things,

0:23:05.940,0:23:07.911
and what to prioritize,[br]and what not to.

0:23:08.207,0:23:11.126
Make your own site with your own standard[br]for what constitutes knowledge

0:23:11.126,0:23:13.352
and what information is important."

0:23:13.352,0:23:15.920
And people could do precisely that.

0:23:15.920,0:23:19.311
But the problem is [br]that Wikidata has a lot of heft behind it

0:23:19.311,0:23:23.173
which is why the decisions[br]that Wikidata makes have so much import.

0:23:23.739,0:23:26.058
There's the fact that it already exists.

0:23:26.058,0:23:28.684
It has a first movers advantage.

0:23:29.358,0:23:31.378
There's the Wikimedia brand.

0:23:31.378,0:23:34.325
There's the funding[br]from places like Google.

0:23:34.325,0:23:36.897
There's the relationships[br]with other institutions.

0:23:36.897,0:23:39.018
When the strategic plan for Wikidata

0:23:39.018,0:23:42.115
calls for engagement [br]and integration with museums,

0:23:42.115,0:23:43.176
that doesn't just result

0:23:43.176,0:23:45.390
in getting more data for Wikidata.

0:23:45.390,0:23:48.611
That also results in Wikidata

0:23:48.611,0:23:52.256
and the decisions its users make[br]permeating more of reality,

0:23:52.256,0:23:57.607
becoming more of a standard[br]of how data systems work,

0:23:58.120,0:24:01.914
and more of a place that is drawn from[br]to populate other spaces.

0:24:04.199,0:24:07.111
So I keep using this line,[br]"Not bad, but dangerous"

0:24:07.111,0:24:10.238
to describe classification systems[br]or to describe Wikidata,

0:24:10.959,0:24:11.991
and I want to reinforce

0:24:11.991,0:24:14.947
that I don't think that Wikidata[br]is inherently bad.

0:24:16.171,0:24:19.141
But I do think that its dangers are vast

0:24:19.141,0:24:21.134
and are not being properly attended to.

0:24:21.134,0:24:23.262
Just by looking at gender,

0:24:23.262,0:24:27.498
we saw three examples,[br]which I pulled very, very quickly,

0:24:27.498,0:24:31.810
of situations where even setting aside

0:24:31.810,0:24:34.950
the sort of objective "accuracy"

0:24:34.950,0:24:38.830
of the information that[br]a Wikidata entry might contain,

0:24:38.830,0:24:43.645
the information it chooses to contain[br]and chooses to prioritize perpetuates

0:24:43.645,0:24:47.255
or silences particular discourses,[br]and particular ideas

0:24:47.255,0:24:51.673
that have weight in the rest of the world,[br]that do harm in the rest of the world.

0:24:52.860,0:24:54.230
And I picked those examples

0:24:54.230,0:24:57.845
not because they're surprising [br]in any way,

0:24:57.946,0:25:00.020
or not because they're unique,

0:25:00.020,0:25:04.258
but simply to point out that[br]if I could find that many problems

0:25:04.258,0:25:07.038
with resonances in wider violent systems

0:25:07.038,0:25:08.987
in such a tiny sliver of content,

0:25:08.987,0:25:11.644
imagine how many others[br]are lurking out there.

0:25:13.750,0:25:17.507
And the goal of Wikidata,

0:25:17.507,0:25:19.385
the goal of universal classification

0:25:19.385,0:25:21.577
if these dangers are not attended to

0:25:21.577,0:25:24.480
could ultimately result,[br]or will ultimately result,

0:25:24.480,0:25:27.661
not in simple like neutral classification,

0:25:27.661,0:25:29.134
but imposition.

0:25:29.134,0:25:31.673
In saying this is the way[br]the world works

0:25:31.673,0:25:33.366
and if you don't like it

0:25:33.366,0:25:37.178
then congrats, you should try[br]and fit into it.

0:25:38.685,0:25:41.856
And I really wish that I had[br]a sort of simple answer for this.

0:25:42.471,0:25:43.526
I don't.

0:25:43.526,0:25:44.613
It's one of the advantages

0:25:44.613,0:25:45.984
of switching to academia

0:25:45.984,0:25:48.116
instead of working [br]in an engineering department.

0:25:48.116,0:25:49.378
You can just show up places

0:25:49.378,0:25:52.311
and go, "Everything[br]is really complicated."

0:25:52.311,0:25:54.089
Someone should do something about that.

0:25:54.875,0:25:56.720
Could I have a grant please?

0:25:56.863,0:25:58.283
(laughter)

0:25:58.466,0:25:59.604
But all I can really do

0:25:59.604,0:26:02.876
is point you back to[br]Bowker and Star's conclusion,

0:26:02.876,0:26:06.604
which is that this isn't ultimately[br]about Wikidata,

0:26:06.604,0:26:08.255
this isn't a problem with Wikidata

0:26:08.255,0:26:10.855
this is that the class of systems

0:26:10.855,0:26:14.244
that Wikidata is a part of[br]has never been done safely

0:26:14.244,0:26:16.659
and there is no reason[br]to think it could be.

0:26:17.703,0:26:19.585
And so my call is ultimately

0:26:19.585,0:26:22.139
not for a particular change,

0:26:22.139,0:26:24.482
or for all of you[br]to just go home and give up.

0:26:24.933,0:26:27.180
It's for the project collectively

0:26:27.180,0:26:29.208
and for you all individually

0:26:29.208,0:26:32.435
to determine how comfortable you are

0:26:32.435,0:26:35.729
with participating and building a system

0:26:35.729,0:26:38.642
that makes a claim to universalism,

0:26:38.642,0:26:42.396
that makes a claim to neutrality[br]and truth in data,

0:26:43.821,0:26:47.170
when we know that that's neither possible

0:26:47.170,0:26:49.661
nor harmless when it fails.

0:26:49.661,0:26:53.145
and if you are not comfortable[br]with that, working to articulate

0:26:53.145,0:26:55.459
what other ways of doing this[br]there might be.

0:26:56.012,0:26:58.789
And these could look like, for example,

0:27:00.271,0:27:03.778
giving primacy[br]to those local Wikibase installs.

0:27:03.778,0:27:05.822
Saying that ultimately

0:27:05.822,0:27:07.866
we need to give individual communities

0:27:07.866,0:27:11.316
and individual contexts[br]and spaces primacy

0:27:11.316,0:27:13.133
in defining what matters to them,

0:27:13.133,0:27:14.842
and how they wish to be defined.

0:27:14.842,0:27:19.327
And the conversation about[br]which perspective should be included

0:27:19.327,0:27:22.235
in some central repository should wait

0:27:22.235,0:27:25.111
until we have [br]the full range of perspectives.

0:27:26.755,0:27:28.877
So, that's everything from me.

0:27:28.877,0:27:31.397
Thank you, everyone,[br]for sitting through this.

0:27:31.713,0:27:35.015
I think we have about 20 to 25 minutes--

0:27:35.015,0:27:38.973
(moderator) 25 minutes for questions,[br]so, please, plentiful.

0:27:39.846,0:27:41.280
Thank you very much.

0:27:41.893,0:27:44.543
(applause)

0:27:46.806,0:27:49.705
(person 2) Thank you so much[br]for this wonderful presentation

0:27:49.705,0:27:52.335
about the problems inherent[br]in classification systems.

0:27:52.335,0:27:54.772
One of the examples you had[br]is really cool

0:27:54.772,0:27:56.415
from a mathematical point of view,

0:27:56.415,0:27:58.469
when you were showing [br]that transgender male

0:27:58.469,0:28:00.935
is the opposite of transgender female--

0:28:00.935,0:28:03.991
or transgender female[br]is the opposite of transgender male

0:28:03.991,0:28:07.386
and the opposite of cisgendered female.

0:28:07.386,0:28:11.737
That makes cisgendered female[br]be the same as transgender male,

0:28:11.737,0:28:13.390
because opposite of is the same--

0:28:13.390,0:28:16.590
if A is opposite of B[br]and C is the opposite of B,

0:28:16.590,0:28:18.178
A and C are the same.

0:28:18.178,0:28:21.034
So actually that's a place [br]where it should be different from

0:28:21.034,0:28:22.820
and not opposite of,

0:28:22.820,0:28:26.191
and that involves[br]a lot of mathematical issues

0:28:26.191,0:28:28.957
when we go to actually ask queries[br]of the database,

0:28:28.957,0:28:31.708
so it's really important[br]that you've pointed out things like that.

0:28:31.708,0:28:34.093
Yeah, another example [br]of that which I thought was fun

0:28:34.093,0:28:38.648
was transsexualism was defined[br]in part further down--

0:28:38.648,0:28:39.879
which I wanted to include,

0:28:39.879,0:28:42.394
but couldn't find a way[br]of fitting it into the flow--

0:28:42.394,0:28:45.704
as the same as sex-reassignment surgery.

0:28:46.579,0:28:48.302
Which is unintentionally hilarious

0:28:48.302,0:28:50.920
because a diagnosis of transsexualism

0:28:50.920,0:28:54.951
was historically a prerequisite[br]for sex-reassignment surgery.

0:28:55.272,0:28:57.702
So it's not so much a chicken[br]and an egg problem

0:28:57.702,0:28:59.648
as the chicken is carrying the egg.

0:28:59.648,0:29:01.068
(laughter)

0:29:02.159,0:29:04.300
Yeah. So yeah, these--

0:29:04.300,0:29:07.896
When we look at Wikidata[br]and how much it uses mathematical,

0:29:07.896,0:29:11.511
or pseudo-mathematical language of, like,

0:29:11.511,0:29:16.040
opposite of, distinct from,[br]in the set of...

0:29:17.080,0:29:18.890
Yeah, reality is more complex

0:29:18.890,0:29:21.826
than the mathematics[br]we have to represent it.

0:29:23.441,0:29:25.323
I don't have a smart answer there[br]except to say

0:29:25.323,0:29:27.160
that I used to be [br]a quantitative researcher

0:29:27.160,0:29:30.417
and I left, [br]and there is a reason for this.

0:29:33.086,0:29:34.403
(moderator) Next question.

0:29:34.403,0:29:35.735
Who raised hands?

0:29:35.735,0:29:37.165
I see a hand over there?

0:29:45.902,0:29:47.279
(person 3) Hello.

0:29:47.739,0:29:49.636
First of all.[br]Thank you for this presentation.

0:29:49.636,0:29:51.452
It was very eye-opening.

0:29:53.417,0:29:55.969
I want to tell you,[br]but first of all--

0:29:55.969,0:29:58.523
there's a Wikimedia--[br]I don't know if you know

0:29:58.523,0:30:00.826
about the community LGBT+ user group.

0:30:00.826,0:30:02.006
So it's a user group,

0:30:02.006,0:30:03.671
and they have this mailing list,

0:30:03.671,0:30:07.589
and they discussing actually [br]the issue of sex and gender in Wikidata,

0:30:07.589,0:30:09.069
and there is some proposals made

0:30:09.069,0:30:11.651
by LGBT+ people to improve it.

0:30:11.651,0:30:14.900
So, but it's not fully done yet.

0:30:14.900,0:30:18.431
So, there are some plans,[br]people working on it.

0:30:18.431,0:30:20.279
It would be great[br]if you want to chime in there

0:30:20.279,0:30:21.578
and give your opinion

0:30:21.578,0:30:24.389
because I'm pretty sure[br]you're more expert than most of us.

0:30:25.149,0:30:28.001
But I want to give a critique[br]of this thing that you said

0:30:28.001,0:30:29.938
about hijra people that said

0:30:29.938,0:30:34.277
out of 20,000 editors of Wikidata,

0:30:34.277,0:30:36.594
assuming 2.8 of them will be hijra

0:30:36.594,0:30:39.747
and they need to overcome[br]all of these 20,000 people

0:30:39.747,0:30:41.147
but this is not true.

0:30:41.147,0:30:45.379
Lots of people, I say assume 20,000 people

0:30:45.379,0:30:47.920
are just unaware of an issue.

0:30:47.920,0:30:49.587
They are not bigots

0:30:49.587,0:30:51.926
or they are not going to actively

0:30:51.926,0:30:54.070
not let people do this.

0:30:54.070,0:30:56.530
And lots of them would help[br]if you tell them.

0:30:56.530,0:30:59.558
Like, as you [inaudible][br]that edits Wikidata,

0:30:59.558,0:31:01.785
I have no idea about this issue

0:31:01.785,0:31:04.162
and if I knew it [br]I would have fixed it.

0:31:04.660,0:31:05.960
So, yeah.

0:31:05.960,0:31:08.300
Yeah. I totally get what you mean.

0:31:08.878,0:31:11.024
And I want to be clear that I'm not saying

0:31:11.334,0:31:12.985
there are 20,000 people,

0:31:12.985,0:31:14.278
many of whom are in this room,

0:31:14.278,0:31:16.487
although only a tiny percentage

0:31:16.487,0:31:19.672
who are vehement bigots[br]and cultural imperialists.

0:31:20.341,0:31:22.180
Instead what I'm getting at[br]is the fact

0:31:22.180,0:31:26.941
that the consensus model,[br]and discussion-based model

0:31:26.941,0:31:31.015
that the WikiProjects are based on

0:31:31.015,0:31:33.085
has a couple of flaws,

0:31:33.085,0:31:34.304
and one of the big flaws

0:31:34.304,0:31:39.238
is that it assumes that all of the voices[br]worth representing are there

0:31:39.238,0:31:42.310
and are represented [br]somewhat proportionately.

0:31:42.310,0:31:46.192
Consensus started off[br]as a model in Quaker communities

0:31:46.192,0:31:49.100
where literally everyone impacted[br]by a decision was in the room,

0:31:49.100,0:31:52.690
because everyone impacted[br]by a decision could fit in the room.

0:31:53.810,0:31:58.700
And so my point[br]with this 2.85 number is not to say

0:31:58.700,0:32:01.421
you have to argue[br]with the entire population of Wikidata

0:32:01.421,0:32:03.497
every time you want to make any decision,

0:32:03.497,0:32:07.518
but instead to say [br]that the consensus model

0:32:07.518,0:32:11.476
and the majoritarian model[br]of what knowledge should be represented

0:32:11.476,0:32:13.846
runs fundamentally into a problem

0:32:13.846,0:32:20.693
when the people[br]who are being underrepresented

0:32:20.693,0:32:22.680
are underrepresented.

0:32:23.634,0:32:26.330
For another example, and a real one,

0:32:27.514,0:32:29.633
Myanmar as a country.

0:32:30.294,0:32:34.524
The English Wikipedia claims [br]that it was called Burma

0:32:34.524,0:32:37.057
until a couple of years ago.

0:32:39.028,0:32:41.258
And the reasoning for this [br]was very simple.

0:32:42.557,0:32:45.368
The BBC didn't like calling it Myanmar

0:32:45.368,0:32:47.568
and a load of editors--

0:32:47.568,0:32:49.376
(person 4) [inaudible] completely wrong.

0:32:49.376,0:32:50.485
Sorry.

0:32:50.485,0:32:51.917
(laughter)

0:32:53.481,0:32:56.057
You run into this issue of like...

0:32:56.057,0:32:58.261
I know it's not the precise thing,[br]but it's just...

0:32:58.261,0:33:01.553
- (person 4) : [inaudible] it's actually--[br]- (moderator) I give you the mic, sir.

0:33:02.184,0:33:03.290
- Yes?[br]- (person 4) I'm sorry,

0:33:03.290,0:33:05.453
that's just incredibly playing [br]being ignorant and that...

0:33:05.453,0:33:07.759
- Okay. Go for it.[br]- (person 4) That's an absolute terrible,

0:33:07.759,0:33:10.460
terrible mischaracterization[br]of the political situation in Myanmar.

0:33:10.460,0:33:11.482
Okay. Go for it.

0:33:11.857,0:33:14.821
(person 4) Anyways, so basically[br]what it is is that the country--

0:33:15.733,0:33:17.339
in the Burmese language

0:33:17.339,0:33:20.111
the country can be referred to as[br]<i>Myanma</i> or <i>Bama</i>.

0:33:20.111,0:33:21.121
Yep.

0:33:21.121,0:33:22.831
<i>Myanma</i> tends to be a more[br]formal register

0:33:22.831,0:33:25.074
and <i>Bama</i> tends to be[br]a little bit more informal register

0:33:25.074,0:33:28.045
but both are acceptable terms[br]for the country.

0:33:30.561,0:33:34.759
The term Burma came obviously[br]from the term <i>Bama</i>,

0:33:36.205,0:33:38.281
but what happened was

0:33:38.281,0:33:40.392
there is no official...

0:33:41.922,0:33:47.512
The country was officially referred[br]to, in English, as Burma

0:33:47.512,0:33:50.186
up until 1988-- 1989, excuse me,

0:33:50.977,0:33:53.361
when the military government[br]of the country

0:33:53.924,0:33:56.419
basically decided,[br]the military junta of the country decided

0:33:56.419,0:33:59.199
that the country should be[br]referred to as <i>Myanma</i>.

0:33:59.454,0:34:04.526
Ostensibly, this was as an attempt[br]to make the country name

0:34:04.526,0:34:07.545
more acceptable to minorities[br]within the country.

0:34:08.022,0:34:10.160
However, this is a bit[br]of historical revisionism

0:34:10.160,0:34:12.864
because <i>Myanma</i> and <i>Bama</i>[br]specifically refer

0:34:12.864,0:34:15.384
to the majority ethnicity in the country.

0:34:15.384,0:34:20.040
So, it was basically the government[br]of Burma at the time--

0:34:20.040,0:34:22.524
trying to make the people[br]equivalent to the country,

0:34:22.524,0:34:23.833
therefore implicitly saying--

0:34:23.833,0:34:25.755
(person 4) Almost the opposite,

0:34:25.755,0:34:27.494
but in a really weird way.

0:34:27.494,0:34:30.500
They basically declared that [br]<i>Bama</i> was in reference to the ethnicity

0:34:30.500,0:34:32.625
and <i>Myanma</i> was in reference[br]to the country,

0:34:32.625,0:34:34.645
when historically they both[br]represent ethnicity

0:34:34.645,0:34:35.798
and the country.

0:34:35.798,0:34:36.879
That makes sense.

0:34:37.060,0:34:42.006
(person 4) But what happen was[br]because Democrat advocates

0:34:42.006,0:34:45.032
within the country[br]believed that the military junta

0:34:45.032,0:34:46.820
did not have the power

0:34:46.820,0:34:48.585
to be able to change [br]the name of the country

0:34:48.585,0:34:49.763
in any language,

0:34:49.763,0:34:52.183
because they were not[br]empowered by the people of the country.

0:34:52.183,0:34:57.655
and were explicitly[br]a military junta that they...

0:34:57.655,0:34:59.371
therefore the country should continue

0:34:59.371,0:35:02.481
to be referred to Burma in English.

0:35:02.481,0:35:05.570
Because of the fact that essentially[br]to call it Myanmar is essentially to say

0:35:05.570,0:35:09.692
the government of Burma and Myanmar[br]at the time was legitimate.

0:35:10.451,0:35:12.629
After the fall of the-- well not fall,

0:35:12.629,0:35:16.776
but after like the semi return [br]of civilian government in 2014,

0:35:18.231,0:35:19.732
this question came up,

0:35:19.732,0:35:22.262
"Okay, should we call this country[br]Burma or Myanmar in English?"

0:35:22.262,0:35:24.705
and essentially,[br]the facto leader of the country,

0:35:24.705,0:35:26.324
Aung San Suu Kyi,

0:35:26.324,0:35:29.281
said that there's nothing [br]in the Burmese constitution

0:35:29.281,0:35:31.426
that says you know,[br]what you should call it in English

0:35:31.426,0:35:32.932
so call it whatever you want.

0:35:33.124,0:35:34.493
I mean the name of the country

0:35:34.493,0:35:38.557
is officially the Union of <i>Myanma</i>[br]in Burmese,

0:35:38.557,0:35:41.025
but as far as in English[br]you can call it whatever you want.

0:35:41.025,0:35:44.916
But generally before the return [br]of the civilian government in Burma,

0:35:45.927,0:35:47.807
to refer to it is as Myanmar[br]was essentially

0:35:47.807,0:35:52.190
to legitimize the military government.

0:35:52.466,0:35:53.611
And so therefore,

0:35:53.611,0:35:57.340
to call it Burma was generally considered[br]to be a specific political act

0:35:57.340,0:35:58.948
to not give that government legitimacy.

0:35:58.948,0:36:02.758
Yeah. So, I'm not saying that[br]that isn't a rationale for it.

0:36:02.758,0:36:06.113
I'm saying that[br]on the English Wikipedia specifically,

0:36:06.113,0:36:10.521
the page went through seven requested[br]move discussions

0:36:10.521,0:36:14.660
over four years [br]and a mediation cabal decision,

0:36:14.660,0:36:17.092
and an attempted structured mediation,

0:36:17.092,0:36:21.179
and a review of one the closures[br]of the move discussion,

0:36:21.179,0:36:23.878
and that when you look[br]at the discussions,

0:36:23.878,0:36:26.511
most of the sort of argument[br]back and forth

0:36:26.511,0:36:29.074
is not about [br]the nuanced political situation

0:36:29.074,0:36:30.205
of the country

0:36:30.205,0:36:33.776
but it's instead about[br]what is the common name in media sources

0:36:33.776,0:36:36.372
and what do[br]different institutions call it.

0:36:36.372,0:36:38.287
And that when you look at the discussion,

0:36:38.287,0:36:42.775
you can see a clear point[br]where pretty much every news organization

0:36:42.775,0:36:45.225
that isn't the BBC[br]in the English Language,

0:36:45.225,0:36:47.941
that's considered like a major[br]western news source

0:36:47.941,0:36:49.849
has switched their language sources,

0:36:49.849,0:36:53.547
and the debate[br]essentially becomes a debate

0:36:53.547,0:36:56.831
of whether we should listen[br]to the <i>Wall Street Journal</i>

0:36:56.831,0:36:58.372
or the BBC.

0:36:58.531,0:37:02.925
So the point I'm making[br]is not about the specific politics

0:37:02.925,0:37:04.685
of the situation, but instead the fact

0:37:04.685,0:37:07.588
that it's really easy for those decisions

0:37:07.588,0:37:12.877
to actually become almost a proxy dispute[br]of how much do we love the BBC,

0:37:14.469,0:37:16.139
and that when you look at the discussions

0:37:16.139,0:37:18.169
you see this really nice case study

0:37:18.169,0:37:21.834
in the issues of having[br]those conversations

0:37:21.834,0:37:25.619
and having those nuanced,[br]and often insider perspectives

0:37:25.619,0:37:28.919
when most of the discussions [br]are centered around

0:37:28.919,0:37:30.421
how much we love the BBC

0:37:30.421,0:37:33.742
and are coming from people[br]who are outside the context.

0:37:34.221,0:37:35.734
So, it's not--

0:37:35.734,0:37:37.323
My point in all of this is basically

0:37:37.323,0:37:41.219
that even if you're not fighting[br]20,000 people,

0:37:42.009,0:37:44.797
even if you're only arguing[br]with 20 people,

0:37:44.797,0:37:47.063
probabilistically, 19 of them

0:37:47.063,0:37:50.732
are going to be people [br]who have very strong opinions,

0:37:50.732,0:37:53.400
who don't necessarily bear [br]any negative consequences

0:37:53.400,0:37:56.095
of whichever change happens,

0:37:56.095,0:37:59.542
but have a particular world view[br]and have decided to stick in it,

0:37:59.542,0:38:03.526
and so the proposals[br]by the LGBTQ+ group

0:38:03.526,0:38:06.320
to change the Wikidata criteria

0:38:06.320,0:38:09.327
might be amazing, I might love them,[br]I might not love them,

0:38:09.327,0:38:11.251
I haven't read them.

0:38:11.688,0:38:14.575
But the base premise of this is...

0:38:15.168,0:38:18.395
We got the people who show up[br]on Wikidata right now,

0:38:18.395,0:38:22.053
and those are the representatives[br]of all queer people

0:38:22.053,0:38:25.912
and this is the universal rule[br]of what should be done

0:38:25.912,0:38:27.840
with the content of all queer people

0:38:27.840,0:38:31.342
is almost a microcosm[br]of the same problem.

0:38:31.512,0:38:34.083
- (moderator) We have another question.[br]- Yep.

0:38:34.437,0:38:35.910
(person 5) Hi.

0:38:36.141,0:38:38.249
I think there's another problem

0:38:38.249,0:38:43.117
with the consensus-based approach we have,

0:38:43.117,0:38:45.754
is that sometimes we have consensus

0:38:45.754,0:38:48.507
on really difficult issues[br]on how to deal with that

0:38:48.507,0:38:52.998
and [inaudible] that on Wikidata,[br]and nobody is reading the discussion.

0:38:53.855,0:38:55.979
Typically, the project Names,

0:38:55.979,0:39:00.560
which is a really, really old[br]WikiProject on Wikidata--

0:39:00.560,0:39:05.020
and names are a really, [br]really complicated issue in the world.

0:39:05.020,0:39:07.952
Not every people of the world[br]have a given name,

0:39:07.952,0:39:12.187
not every people have a family name,[br]not, well, you have an idea.

0:39:12.187,0:39:15.259
And there are so many[br]writing systems out there,

0:39:15.259,0:39:18.103
and we have, actually, a system

0:39:18.103,0:39:22.181
which was working[br]for many cases in the world

0:39:22.181,0:39:23.900
on how to use properties,

0:39:23.900,0:39:25.904
what items should look like,

0:39:25.904,0:39:28.326
how to link these together [br]and everything--

0:39:28.326,0:39:30.024
We have eight pages--

0:39:30.024,0:39:34.303
nobody is reading that,[br]and someone just added

0:39:34.303,0:39:39.045
Latin script family names[br]to a Chinese researcher.

0:39:39.880,0:39:44.493
So, we don't have the names[br]of these researchers

0:39:44.493,0:39:48.790
but we know for sure [br]that the value added was wrong.

0:39:48.790,0:39:50.185
I don't have the correct value,

0:39:50.185,0:39:52.195
but I know this one[br]is not the correct value.

0:39:52.740,0:39:57.241
And it's not just discussing the issue

0:39:57.241,0:39:59.363
because we have big discussions

0:39:59.363,0:40:01.082
and we have actually modeling

0:40:01.082,0:40:07.570
which is mostly working on[br]and even qualifier on things to deal

0:40:07.570,0:40:09.548
with more complicated cases

0:40:09.548,0:40:13.574
but people are just,[br]"Oh, given names suggest a property,

0:40:13.574,0:40:15.321
I will just add that."

0:40:16.049,0:40:17.713
- No.[br]- Yeah.

0:40:18.220,0:40:21.354
I think it's not just [br]how to model thing,

0:40:21.354,0:40:25.302
it's really how to explain [br]to people the model,

0:40:25.302,0:40:30.595
and that's a technical part--[br]we could have tools with suggestions

0:40:30.595,0:40:34.515
and I think the constraint thing[br]which went live last year

0:40:34.515,0:40:36.227
is a great thing for that.

0:40:36.446,0:40:39.754
But even when we know to model thing,

0:40:39.910,0:40:44.569
it's how to make[br]this model known to people.

0:40:44.569,0:40:49.029
That's a bit technical issue[br]on how to do that better.

0:40:53.566,0:40:55.090
(moderator) So, there was just remark.

0:40:55.090,0:40:57.881
There's no real question for you?

0:40:58.315,0:40:59.738
Or that's a question to you?

0:40:59.738,0:41:02.061
- How to do that.[br]- (person 5) Yeah, it's a question.

0:41:02.679,0:41:05.971
(person 5): Sorry,[br]even if we have the discussion,

0:41:05.971,0:41:07.486
(moderator) Yeah, sure.

0:41:08.346,0:41:10.826
(person 5) My question,[br]if I was not clear, is that

0:41:10.826,0:41:12.947
even when everyone is in agreement

0:41:12.947,0:41:15.210
on how to model complicated cases,

0:41:15.210,0:41:20.375
how do we make technically[br]the model known for project

0:41:20.375,0:41:22.385
with the scope of Wikidata,

0:41:22.385,0:41:26.690
so people are not adding[br]the wrong value in good faith?

0:41:26.690,0:41:30.216
Because our problem is both.

0:41:30.216,0:41:33.516
We have trouble[br]modeling complicated realities,

0:41:33.516,0:41:39.132
and we have trouble explaining[br]to users, how to follow the model

0:41:39.132,0:41:40.530
we actually have.

0:41:40.530,0:41:42.157
Yep.

0:41:43.436,0:41:45.675
I will say that [br]if I could solve that problem

0:41:45.675,0:41:48.232
which is to reframe it,

0:41:48.232,0:41:52.601
how to reliably and consistently[br]enculture new users

0:41:52.601,0:41:57.142
into having the same view [br]and understanding

0:41:57.142,0:41:59.520
of the project space,

0:41:59.520,0:42:01.548
then they would let me graduate

0:42:01.548,0:42:03.110
and also give me a job.

0:42:03.110,0:42:09.235
It's the second oldest problem[br]in internet spaces is how to do that.

0:42:09.235,0:42:12.144
The oldest problem is writing a system

0:42:12.144,0:42:14.494
that will automatically detect insults.

0:42:16.121,0:42:18.591
I will say that...

0:42:18.591,0:42:21.020
You can look back at Wikipedia,

0:42:21.020,0:42:22.680
or before that, [br]there was the phenomenon

0:42:22.680,0:42:26.897
of eternal September on Usenet

0:42:26.897,0:42:30.295
which was, "Oh these people keep--[br]AOL disks have gone everywhere

0:42:30.295,0:42:31.487
and now there's newcomers

0:42:31.487,0:42:34.033
all the time who don't know [br]how things work around here,

0:42:34.033,0:42:37.861
and everything is drowning[br]in people hitting "Reply All."

0:42:39.804,0:42:42.340
Generally speaking,[br]the place that I would look for that

0:42:42.340,0:42:47.691
is there is a discipline called,[br]"Computer-supported collaborative work,"

0:42:47.944,0:42:49.750
and one of their big questions

0:42:49.750,0:42:54.465
is this question of onboarding,[br]and of like...

0:42:54.979,0:42:57.907
making the culture known to people.

0:42:57.907,0:43:01.203
But it may not be something [br]that is directly solvable,

0:43:01.203,0:43:03.301
or that we want to directly solve, right?

0:43:03.301,0:43:06.751
So, Susan Leigh Star[br]who wrote <i>Sorting Things Out,</i>

0:43:06.751,0:43:08.144
one of her other contributions

0:43:08.144,0:43:12.586
was generally the study of infrastructures

0:43:12.586,0:43:15.339
of which I would argue Wikidata[br]is definitely one,

0:43:15.844,0:43:18.757
and of the things that she argued

0:43:18.757,0:43:21.706
was that infrastructures [br]make themselves known

0:43:21.706,0:43:23.012
through using them.

0:43:23.012,0:43:27.564
So like, basically the only way[br]to work out how a system works

0:43:27.564,0:43:31.730
is to engage with it,[br]and trip over, and fall flat on your face,

0:43:31.730,0:43:34.761
and learn not to fall over that way again.

0:43:35.156,0:43:39.903
And I think everyone everywhere,[br]including new users,

0:43:40.718,0:43:42.906
including people [br]coming from other projects,

0:43:42.906,0:43:48.620
wants a way of approaching this[br]where they don't have to fall over.

0:43:49.291,0:43:51.411
But I'm not sure if that exists,

0:43:51.411,0:43:55.521
and I think that a better place[br]we might look is maybe to ask

0:43:56.321,0:43:58.934
what are the consequences[br]of people screwing up

0:43:58.934,0:44:02.512
and how do we make screwing up[br]an understandable

0:44:02.512,0:44:07.152
and a more expected component[br]of the user experience.

0:44:07.517,0:44:09.696
(moderator) Okay thanks.[br]Next question.

0:44:10.750,0:44:11.990
(person 6) Thank you.

0:44:13.118,0:44:15.478
So, first, thank you very much[br]for your presentation to us.

0:44:15.478,0:44:17.486
Again, someone said, eye-opening.

0:44:18.172,0:44:23.195
I was looking at the specific item[br]on transsexualism,

0:44:23.836,0:44:27.231
and it's actually even more interesting

0:44:27.231,0:44:29.467
because I was looking[br]at different Wikipedias,

0:44:29.467,0:44:32.244
how they dealt with the issue.

0:44:32.441,0:44:34.512
And I just look at three.

0:44:34.682,0:44:38.193
So, apparently, what[br]we are seeing on Wikidata

0:44:38.193,0:44:44.390
actually reflects pretty much[br]what happened to some extent

0:44:44.830,0:44:47.253
at some level on English Wikipedia,

0:44:47.253,0:44:50.818
whereas if you look[br]at Portuguese Wikipedia,

0:44:51.384,0:44:55.477
the actual item connects to transgender,

0:44:56.429,0:45:02.271
and on French Wikipedia[br]it connects to trans identity

0:45:02.835,0:45:07.930
whereas transsexualism is a redirect[br]in both Portuguese and French.

0:45:08.569,0:45:14.511
And I was looking at the history[br]of editing on the Wikidata item,

0:45:15.185,0:45:18.899
and if you look at--[br]there were several sort of wars

0:45:18.899,0:45:22.424
but the discussion page[br]is actually only one line,

0:45:22.719,0:45:26.015
but there were several conflicts[br]between editors,

0:45:26.015,0:45:28.369
particularly with the French

0:45:28.369,0:45:32.143
that were opposing[br]the use of transsexualism.

0:45:32.143,0:45:35.947
If you look at the names of the items[br]on each language,

0:45:35.947,0:45:38.924
the only one on which[br]you don't have transsexualism

0:45:38.924,0:45:41.182
is French for trans identity,

0:45:41.182,0:45:45.100
and then someone came,[br]and did what you said about

0:45:45.100,0:45:47.478
it's the opposite [inaudible],[br]trans identity,

0:45:47.478,0:45:50.734
and then there is a different item that--

0:45:50.734,0:45:51.940
Oh yeah.

0:45:51.940,0:45:56.356
(person 6) So, it's a complete[br]global fight over...

0:45:56.356,0:45:59.498
basically it's reverberating conflicts

0:45:59.498,0:46:03.221
that are apparently also

0:46:03.221,0:46:08.462
the manifestations of conflicts[br]that happen on each Wikipedia.

0:46:08.462,0:46:12.224
Yes, that also reflect conflicts[br]in local cultures,

0:46:12.224,0:46:14.462
and in different parts[br]of the world, yeah...

0:46:14.757,0:46:16.718
And I'd argue that, I mean,

0:46:16.718,0:46:20.524
I'm British so I have a tendency[br]to say, "Wait, fighting with the French?"

0:46:20.524,0:46:21.652
"Yes, Please!"

0:46:21.652,0:46:22.873
(laughter)

0:46:22.873,0:46:27.094
But I'd say there's almost something[br]more fundamental than that,

0:46:27.094,0:46:29.478
and you can make an argument[br]in the other direction.

0:46:29.478,0:46:32.651
I can, as a trans person, make an argument[br]in the other direction and say,

0:46:32.651,0:46:36.070
"Actually, it's the French [br]and Portuguese who have it wrong."

0:46:36.070,0:46:38.274
Because the actual question is

0:46:38.274,0:46:40.456
is the entry transsexualism about

0:46:40.456,0:46:44.947
the medical classification,[br]or the state of being,

0:46:45.166,0:46:48.343
or the historic medical classification,

0:46:48.343,0:46:50.938
or the historic term[br]for the state of being,

0:46:50.938,0:46:53.517
or are these different entries,[br]or the same entries?

0:46:53.517,0:46:56.418
When are things distinct enough[br]to be different objects,

0:46:56.418,0:46:58.646
and how do we negotiate that fight

0:46:58.646,0:47:00.780
between people who think[br]that the medical status

0:47:00.780,0:47:04.268
and the identity are the same thing,[br]or different things.

0:47:05.273,0:47:08.032
But yeah, there is no easy answer

0:47:08.032,0:47:10.496
but yeah, I suspect [br]if you look at a lot of these examples,

0:47:10.496,0:47:12.588
and if you look [br]at a lot of controversies,

0:47:12.588,0:47:13.829
generally on Wikidata

0:47:13.829,0:47:17.548
what you're going to see is[br]these fights over...

0:47:17.548,0:47:19.225
These almost negotiations

0:47:19.225,0:47:20.861
are the local community norms,

0:47:20.861,0:47:23.692
and beyond that are the cultural norms.

0:47:23.949,0:47:25.597
Which is a problem because again,

0:47:25.597,0:47:28.804
when we're talking about marginalized[br]or minority groups,

0:47:29.314,0:47:33.582
we would expect them to also[br]be marginalized within Wiki communities,

0:47:33.582,0:47:36.594
and also within Wikidata,

0:47:36.594,0:47:38.440
and so Wikidata is sort of...

0:47:39.701,0:47:42.901
building on these[br]preexisting prioritizations

0:47:42.901,0:47:45.343
of whose knowledge matters,[br]and under what circumstances

0:47:45.343,0:47:47.059
and in what form.

0:47:48.129,0:47:51.485
(person 7): I wanted to touch[br]on something you mentioned.

0:47:52.415,0:47:57.790
Everything is complex[br]and I think modeling it right,

0:47:57.790,0:48:00.322
getting it right on Wikidata

0:48:00.322,0:48:02.661
is not the sum of the issue.

0:48:02.661,0:48:05.263
As you said, Wikidata is infrastructure,

0:48:05.263,0:48:08.621
and as [Hermione] said,

0:48:08.621,0:48:12.917
we have gotten it right perhaps[br]in some things, in some other topics,

0:48:12.917,0:48:15.375
and still can't [br]actually practice it right.

0:48:15.375,0:48:16.500
Yep.

0:48:16.500,0:48:18.098
(person 7): So I want to suggest that

0:48:18.098,0:48:21.618
this is a prevalent condition[br]of the human race.

0:48:22.880,0:48:28.480
And however well we model something,[br]even if we model gender

0:48:29.187,0:48:32.900
ten times more complexly[br]than we do today,

0:48:33.316,0:48:36.492
most SPARQL queries involving gender[br]would not bother

0:48:36.492,0:48:38.159
- with the qualifiers right?[br]- Yeah.

0:48:38.159,0:48:42.333
And would still generate very,[br]very flattened, very simplified results.

0:48:42.333,0:48:46.862
Google's use of our data[br]in the infamous Google infoboxes

0:48:46.862,0:48:49.689
will also flatten the data[br]and ignore qualifiers.

0:48:49.929,0:48:51.766
That is not going to change.

0:48:51.766,0:48:54.646
Wikidata will continue to be used [br]in simplistic ways.

0:48:55.654,0:48:57.179
Indeed, the majority of use,

0:48:57.179,0:48:59.397
probably, will be that simplistic thing.

0:49:00.020,0:49:03.583
My point is, it's probably not fixable

0:49:03.583,0:49:05.441
and we shouldn't stop trying.

0:49:06.804,0:49:08.816
I mean we should try to get it right

0:49:08.816,0:49:12.753
and understand that a lot of the use is,[br]despite our best efforts,

0:49:12.753,0:49:14.643
going to be simplistic and wrong.

0:49:14.643,0:49:16.439
Yep. I would agree with that.

0:49:16.951,0:49:18.629
I guess I would say that

0:49:18.629,0:49:20.469
you know,[br]it's not about like,

0:49:20.469,0:49:23.691
my issue here is not about[br]it being you know,

0:49:23.691,0:49:26.259
there is one true [br]incredibly complex answer.

0:49:28.099,0:49:30.432
At some point I just gave up

0:49:30.432,0:49:36.138
even in my thesis which is about[br]transness and technology

0:49:36.138,0:49:37.900
of defining transness.

0:49:37.900,0:49:39.473
I just gave up.

0:49:39.673,0:49:44.727
And I instead took what is referred to[br]as a pragmatist view,

0:49:44.727,0:49:47.077
which is basically that[br]it is whatever the people

0:49:47.077,0:49:49.278
in the situation that you're studying[br]believe it to be,

0:49:49.278,0:49:53.447
and however they construct[br]the world as if it were,

0:49:54.983,0:49:56.559
and what I'm getting at this

0:49:56.559,0:49:59.377
is not that there is[br]some universal definition

0:49:59.377,0:50:01.696
of anything which,[br]if sufficiently complicated,

0:50:01.696,0:50:04.760
would be enough,

0:50:04.760,0:50:08.775
but instead that I think[br]that the scale is the problem,

0:50:08.775,0:50:10.898
and the universalism is the problem.

0:50:12.650,0:50:14.560
Maybe we should keep trying,

0:50:14.560,0:50:16.065
or maybe we should stop.

0:50:16.065,0:50:18.846
Maybe we should instead say[br]that, again,

0:50:18.846,0:50:23.442
there should be a Wikibase install[br]in every self-defined community

0:50:23.442,0:50:27.893
that wants it and they can define things,[br]and articulate things

0:50:27.893,0:50:30.220
to their own satisfaction.

0:50:30.800,0:50:32.995
But then we end up in more political

0:50:32.995,0:50:37.023
and fraught debates of a reformist[br]versus radical actions,

0:50:37.023,0:50:40.186
and how you open a box[br]with a crowbar that's already inside it,

0:50:40.186,0:50:42.241
and I end up quoting Foucault for an hour,

0:50:42.241,0:50:44.185
and everyone gets sad.

0:50:44.535,0:50:46.929
Including me because I hate Foucault.

0:50:47.495,0:50:49.249
So this might be a discussion[br]for elsewhere.

0:50:49.249,0:50:51.687
But generally agreed, I just--

0:50:51.977,0:50:54.236
I would raise questions about

0:50:54.236,0:50:55.691
whether we should keep trying

0:50:55.691,0:50:57.699
for a better form of universalism,

0:50:57.699,0:51:00.145
or whether the problem [br]is that universalism.

0:51:00.704,0:51:03.495
I'm guessing we have[br]a time for one more? Yeah.

0:51:04.040,0:51:07.516
(person 8): This is a short question, [br]possibly complex answer.

0:51:07.776,0:51:10.131
One of the most popular

0:51:10.131,0:51:15.352
and used properties is sex[br]or gender on Wikidata.

0:51:16.329,0:51:18.135
Could you speak to whether you find

0:51:18.135,0:51:24.640
that merging useful,[br]productive, problematic?

0:51:26.264,0:51:28.276
Sure, I mean I think it's always

0:51:28.276,0:51:30.209
going to be reductive [br]cause it's a merging.

0:51:31.137,0:51:35.700
But I also think[br]that it is deeply tiresome

0:51:36.790,0:51:38.602
in a way that's kind of interesting

0:51:38.602,0:51:42.423
insofar as it reveals[br]the limitations of Wikidata,

0:51:42.423,0:51:44.035
though Wikidata claims to be building

0:51:44.035,0:51:47.298
towards this like big objective[br]set of knowledge,

0:51:47.298,0:51:49.454
but ultimately kind of [br]smushed these things together

0:51:49.454,0:51:52.648
because I mean they haven't asked

0:51:52.648,0:51:55.862
most people who have entries[br]what their gender is,

0:51:55.862,0:51:57.287
and/or what their sex is,

0:51:57.287,0:51:59.266
and so they just merge them

0:51:59.266,0:52:01.812
so that inference is easier.

0:52:02.037,0:52:04.811
But generally speaking, yeah,[br]I say that the merging

0:52:04.811,0:52:08.833
of the two together[br]is reductive and dangerous

0:52:08.833,0:52:10.229
but...

0:52:11.517,0:52:13.217
Again it's not...

0:52:13.645,0:52:15.027
There is no good way of doing it.

0:52:15.027,0:52:17.682
I think this is a particularly bad way

0:52:18.400,0:52:22.263
of treating them [br]as interchangeable things,

0:52:22.993,0:52:26.371
and treating them[br]as forever-linked things,

0:52:27.985,0:52:31.728
but I can't suggest a better way[br]that remains--

0:52:32.147,0:52:33.866
that continues to have Wikidata

0:52:33.866,0:52:36.484
even tracking this information[br]or the information contained

0:52:36.484,0:52:38.134
in that at all.

0:52:38.592,0:52:40.671
(moderator): Okay.[br]I think we have to conclude here.

0:52:40.671,0:52:42.335
I still saw some raised hands

0:52:42.335,0:52:43.565
so hopefully you'll be around.

0:52:43.565,0:52:45.529
Yeah. I am a grad student.

0:52:45.529,0:52:47.316
I have functionally no life, so...

0:52:47.316,0:52:48.359
(laughter)

0:52:48.359,0:52:51.632
(moderator): Perfect. Okay.[br]So please come and talk.

0:52:52.311,0:52:53.801
Thank you very much.

0:52:54.035,0:52:56.181
(applause)