Is content screened before showing up on Outernet?

I truly wish all the best for this project, but the face of any content delivery system is… well, the content itself.

To help me decide whether to continue any microscopic involvement that I might have by testing various technical aspects of Outernet reception,it would be helpful to know if one of the articles downloaded today is the type of thing that will continue on the system.

I should stress that I have no objection to sexual content in general, but as this system grows and is perhaps scrutinized by the press and decision makers in various parts of the world, it’s hard to imagine anything but negative reactions to an illustrated guide to anal sex.

I am NOT a do-gooder… but am just asking a sincere question as to whether that is the kind of content we should expect here.

My very best regards to all.

Was that a Wikipedia article?

To answer your question, no, we do not review every Wikipedia article that is broadcast. The community uploaded content, however, does receive manual review.

Yes sir, it was a Wikipedia item.

And I certainly don’t know the best way to handle content on a service such as this, but I compare it to a supply ship destined for the Space Station. There is limited capacity, so it only makes sense to use care in the choices about what items are included in the delivery.

As for taste, I would just not want to be the one asking for donated bandwidth, financial contributions, or appear in any other forum where someone might counter my request with the pictures that were in this item today.

We have no interesting in censoring Wikipedia, but at the same time, we do need to be mindful of this sort of thing. I also don’t have an answer. @Abhishek

We could always change the source to Wikipedia for Schools, but that has not been updated in years. Wikipedia Simple English is an option, but even that is not totally G-rated. Any suggestions on how to solve for this problem would be greatly appreciated.

This definitely needs to be discussed, but CENSORSHIP is a very slippery slope.

For the time being you should put up a warning that

"Accessing The Content being downloaded is an EXPERIMENTAL, download service of RANDOM UNCHECKED Content from WIKIPEDIA’S FULL-Database. Please be aware Certain articles may offend. "

1 Like

Good idea. My first thought on seeing the title of today’s article on the “in progress” screen (Tuner Settings tab) was that someone must have hacked into your upload mechanism.

The warning is a very good idea. Low-tech, but effective.

or from the raw data:

Sorting by editorial assessments could be good. Once the data is sent out, it likely won’t be refreshed in a long time - so sending out articles that are more mature in their editing seems like a good use of bandwidth. Looking at the higher recent hit count pages also lets the Wikipedia files being broadcasted serve as a proxy for current events.

1 Like

Thats exactly what is being done! If you look at the you will find the “offending” page listed.

1 Like

K4KDR … I totally agree with you. The content could be read by children. In this country and many others the sexual content would be considered crude and not acceptable for general public. The FCC could be involved in the US.

BTW the download is stuck at 70% on the Hillary_Clinton. I notice this time Packet Failure Count is high, not like before when download was stuck. SNR is above 2.5 right now.


Yes, same here on the stuck item:

Hillary_Clinton.html.tgz (70%)

… not sure what this one might have in common with an item last week that similarly refused to completely download, but I’m sure there are lots of lessons to learn as the system evolves.

QTH? I’m near Los Angeles. Using Pi3, and the 3 items from Outernet. And rxOS 3.0 Were you near hurricane? W6RWN

Central VA, so we got heavy rain & wind on the backside as it moved NE, but were very lucky. The real damage & flooding was south of here.

Glad you’re safe! Still too hot here for third of the way through October. No rain for months.

Sorry I’m going to interject here, Censoring wikipedia is not a productive use of resources and is counteractive of the purpose of this project… And using the “its for the children” argument again is a red herring… should there be a warning… possibly… but isn’t the entire point of this to get data to places where its hard to get and/or also heavily censored?

Picking and choosing out of a known resource is a slippery slope indeed… Its one thing to censor user content, its another to dilute an encyclopedia…Unfortunately what happens once you start cutting based on what folks dont like, it will lead to more… altering the content and breaking up a resource… then more folks will find offense… untill you have completely gutted the original resource… just because it “offends” you… Case in point… if i posted an article on Trump and it was deleted due to “possibly offensive” content… would the corresponding Hillary article be also deemed offensive, or would it be left up to Outernet to say… We dont like X candidate, therefore it will be censored out…

1 Like

And for the disclaimer you are NOT a do-gooder…You are one… Scott’s posting is a thinly veiled threat… “To help me decide whether to continue any microscopic involvement…” that implies that you expect them to censor content the way you desire or you will not assist in the development of the system… ERGO your pushing your agenda… Don’t try to sugarcoat it… The problem is once you start censoring content… where do you stop? I do not care to see some things in Wikipedia… but its there… Your making choices that are really up for the content consumers to make… Unfortunately I can’t be the one to tell you “The exits are clearly marked”… Im also pretty sure youd be offended at pregnancy, abortion, any other possible issues that might “offend your sensibilities” and “what about the CHILDREN”… Uhm young and impressionable folks should not be using any data sources without supervision, … Outernets job is not to be your nanny… The main problem is the precedent your setting… if folks in remote areas wanted censored news and information… they wouldnt be seeking outernet…Theres always news and local media and propaganda from your local govt…

1 Like

I think it’s a really bad idea to start censoring stuff based on potential offensiveness. For example on this anal sex wikipedia article, there are probably thousands of homosexuals in countries where discussion of topics like this is banned who could benefit from reading it. The information about the health and safety of it could be life saving.

The best compromise is probably to have a “child lock” password option, and have a system that looks for offensive words in articles. Those would be marked as “not for children” and then they would be automatically locked, unless the password is entered.


In my experience none of these preventative measures ever work.

I think we just need a clear warning.

What is Wikipedia’s policy on potentially offensive information?

1 Like

Looks like another problem file today - “test.php.jpg”. Take a look at the source - it’s a reverse shell script, i.e., a crude attempt at exploiting receivers. I haven’t looked too closely but it doesn’t look like rxOS is even capable of executing the script.

I’d be against censoring the Anal sex article too.

Useful information for many. Particularly gay people in the Islamic world. I note this article on Female Genital Mutilation is on that list too: Whatever censorship we use here will presumably apply to that too?

1 Like