Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PayPal Withdraws WikiLeaks Donation Service

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the no-funds-for-you dept.

The Almighty Buck 794

ItsIllak writes "The BBC are reporting that PayPal is the latest company to abandon WikiLeaks. The list now includes their DNS providers (EveryDNS) and their hosts (Amazon). PayPal's move is unlikely to result in many more people boycotting the company, as most knowledgeable on-line users will have been refusing to use them for years for a wide variety of abusive practices." Adds reader jg21: "As open source freedom fighter Simon Phipps writes in his ComputerWorldUK blog, behavior like this by Amazon and Tableau [and now PayPal] 'informs us as customers of web services and cloud computing services that we are never safe from intentional outages when the business interests of our host are challenged.'"

cancel ×

794 comments

Sauce for the gander (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443440)

If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to worry about.

Isn't that what they tell us when they pry into our affairs...?

Re:Sauce for the gander (5, Insightful)

devbox (1919724) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443444)

Paypal did the same to cryptome.org, however they later reactivated the account. However, now this is "official" announcement on their blog, so I'm not sure it will happen this time.

I guess leaking secrets and wrongdoing is all ok until it's about you or your country.

Re:Sauce for the gander (3, Interesting)

jgardia (985157) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443586)

Bah, they just need to leak some info about PayPal now, to thank them.

Re:Sauce for the gander (3, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443642)

I'm guessing that's what this is about. But realistically now that they've cut off Wikileaks they've got precisely zero leverage. Previously they could pull that stunt they like and hold everybody's money ransom for....

One Meeeleon Dollars.

Re:Sauce for the gander (3, Insightful)

lgw (121541) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443814)

Really, what new information could come to light about PayPal to make the seem worse than they already seem?

3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443442)

Yea! Aren't you PROUD to be an American?

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (4, Informative)

electron sponge (1758814) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443498)

Yea! Aren't you PROUD to be an American?

Yes

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443620)

well then you're an idiot

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (3, Insightful)

Mysteray (713473) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443728)

But he's not an Anonymous Coward calling others names on Slashdot.

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (2)

Motard (1553251) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443674)

Me too.

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (4, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443748)

Me too.

I see you're an AOL user. Didn't know they were still around.

Re:3 cheers for Land of the Free!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443770)

You can only take pride in being American if it took you some work to become one. If all it took you was being born there's nothing for you to take pride in. Otherwise its more appropriate to say you're "happy" to be an American.

.

Rather symbolic isn't it? (4, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443446)

Wikileaks, which is revealing the truth about governments and therefore aiding (in a way) the democratic process - is being killed off because it is risky for companies to continue supporting it....

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (0, Troll)

Dasuraga (1147871) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443556)

I really don't see how just throwing out a bunch of diplomatic cables "helps" the democratic process. More likely than not these companies just don't want to be associated with a group whose reason for being recently seems to be releasing all the sensitive information they can get their hands on, without any sort of analysis. In my book, that's not journalism, and these diplomatic cable releases is far from whistleblowing (99% of these cables don't reveal much of anything), just spying on the US government.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (5, Interesting)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443590)

So, journalism is only journalism when you approve of the content? Does that extend to all press or is this just your special "lex wikileaks"? Freedom of the press, yes or no?

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (3, Insightful)

Dasuraga (1147871) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443662)

I'm not discussing whether wikileaks has a right to do what it does, but rather whether it should. If they were looking through these cables themselves, pointing out the specific cables with sensitive information, and actually analyzing them( what the guardian, the nyt, etc have been doing), then I wouldn't be complaining as much. But instead they just release these dumps, if only to say "500000 CABLES!"

Associating wikileaks to the press is an insult to journalistic endeavors. At most they've just become a source for real journalists... one with a huge ego.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (5, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443744)

What in high heavens has the ego of Assange to do with anything? You are just taking part in the good old character assassination campaign. They got material, they published the material, they are journalists. Freedom of press exists outside of your personal stamp of approval - thank god.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (-1, Troll)

peragrin (659227) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443788)

Out of all the cables only a couple hundred are actually damning, or show bad things of any kind.

The rest is gossip.

Even the National Enquirer has a higher rate of good journalism than that.

Why release 49,000 documents of political gossip when 1,000 of them have actual evidence in them?

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (5, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443828)

So what is the problem then with publishing documents that are basically just "gossip"? All harmless, isn't it? You can't have it both ways.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (4, Insightful)

gnola14 (1764100) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443832)

Because what you consider "gossip" some other can consider a valuable information. It's not up to you (or Wikileaks) to judge whether one document is more important than other...

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (3, Insightful)

nstlgc (945418) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443592)

You mean spying as in "The US spies on UN officials" ?

well then fuck those companies (1, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443634)

if those companies are not FOR freedom of speech and information, then it means they are enemies of it. REGARDLESS of their reasons. a tool for oppression, is a tool for oppression. it doesnt matter zit, whether the company shows business reasons as an excuse.

If, you are helping censorship, oppression, it means YOU ARE HELPING CENSORSHIP AND OPPRESSION.

Re:well then fuck those companies (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443732)

How is the contrary (ie, forcing companies to host and support any speech whether they like it or not) no less oppressive?

So if the Neo-Nazis or NAMBLA want to be hosted by Amazon, Amazon has to let them? What about a rival entity, like B&N? Does PayPal have to handle transactions for their rivals? By your all-caps logic, to deny them would be OPPRESSION and AGAINST FREE SPEECH.

Things aren't black and white. I won't try to dictate where the line is drawn between standing for oppression and standing for freedom, but please try to grasp that there is a discussion that needs to be had (and continuously had, not just once) about it. Your view isn't the only one or even the one that results in the fairest, most reasonable outcome.

Re:well then fuck those companies (2, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443772)

How is the contrary (ie, forcing companies to host and support any speech whether they like it or not) no less oppressive? So if the Neo-Nazis or NAMBLA want to be hosted by Amazon, Amazon has to let them? What about a rival entity, like B&N? Does PayPal have to handle transactions for their rivals? By your all-caps logic, to deny them would be OPPRESSION and AGAINST FREE SPEECH. Things aren't black and white. I won't try to dictate where the line is drawn between standing for oppression and standing for freedom, but please try to grasp that there is a discussion that needs to be had (and continuously had, not just once) about it. Your view isn't the only one or even the one that results in the fairest, most reasonable outcome.

dont bullshit. there are set standards in regard to declaration of human rights, on this planet. EVERYthing that is considered civil and modern ideals and principles for civilization today, are based on these.

seeking to kill people based on race does not relate to any of those principles.

your argument is null and void.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (3, Insightful)

neumayr (819083) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443702)

Of course it's not journalism - whoever called it journalism? Except in order to protect the sources of course.
It does provide some interesting input for journalists though, things they maybe wouldn't have legal access to otherwise. That makes it a part of the journalistic process and justifies giving it that legal status. Watching the government can't be bad, it makes officials more accountable among other things. Protecting the sources is essential for that.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443790)

Well, democracy is about the people deciding which governmental party (and canditates) better reflect their own beliefs and the good of the country.

Knowing what exactly everyone is getting up to - helps push this process along nicely. The diplomatic cables, not so much. The horrors of the wars in the middle east - quite a bit I think.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (1)

xded (1046894) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443666)

Risky because of truth about governments or because of the upcoming truth about banks?

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (5, Insightful)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443740)

If the government threatened to shut down your business because you were supporting Wikileaks, you would probably cave too. The real issue here, as always, is government pressure and the power of the state.

Re:Rather symbolic isn't it? (4, Insightful)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443804)

Wikileaks, which is revealing the truth about governments and therefore aiding (in a way) the democratic process

How have they done either? What is your truth? Isolationism? What would you do at the reigns of a nation? "Please stop?", "They're all nuts, close all our windows!"

The truth is, most people continue to not understand politics, local and especially international. Just as "assist ugly nation X suppress worse nation Y" doesn't mesh with anyone's rose colored view of the world, "congressman from state X brings huge contract to state X" is met with "gah, teh corruption!!!1"

Everyone wants to believe in some Us vs. Them fantasy world, where Them is fully cognizant, aware and intentionally driving Us in some direction against Our will, unbeknownst to Us, except for You and your favorite radio/TV Host.

Wikileaks can't fix that.

Seriously, how has Wikileaks "aided the democratic process"?

Freedom (4, Insightful)

Stellian (673475) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443452)

Freedom works both ways. I give you the freedom of speech, but please allow me the freedom to not do business with you.
I don't so much mind the fact that some american businesses are bigoted red-necks. The politicians are the one to watch.

Thems fightin words..... (1)

Crock23A (1124275) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443466)

I must say, this is sizing up to be quite an interesting chapter in our history. The pressure put on these companies by angry or embarrassed government entities must be enormous.

Re:Thems fightin words..... (4, Insightful)

electron sponge (1758814) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443544)

I must say, this is sizing up to be quite an interesting chapter in our history. The pressure put on these companies by angry or embarrassed government entities must be enormous.

Or nonexistent. Seeing as we've seen no report of governmental influence other than one company saying they unilaterally booted Wikileaks after a Senator made a public statement condemning Wikileaks, any supposition of governmental pressure is pure conjecture. One could also surmise that companies might find doing business with a website which is at the very least hostile toward the US government isn't part of their business plan and cut ties. Or maybe they're really patriotic. The point is, we don't know if the government has pressured American companies not to do business with Wikileaks. I suspect it wouldn't take much leaning on the part of the government to convince them to stop, at any rate. I know this doesn't fit the narrative here at /., what with all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, but in the real world businesses do what is in their own best interests.

Re:Thems fightin words..... (5, Interesting)

Moryath (553296) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443632)

Actually, the US has laws against funding terrorist organizations, and is moving to try to put Wikileaks on that list. So there may be either fear on the part of the businesses, or else behind-the-scenes pressure (a "friendly warning" from the FBI for instance) to do so.

At the same time, I can't fault Paypal for their actions. I used to donate to UNICEF, but I stopped when it was revealed that a sizable portion of money from them was being used to fund "summer camps" like the Wafa Idris, Ayyat al-Akhras and Dalal Mughrabi summer camps; these are named after suicide bombing terrorists and places where nothing but hate and racism is taught to children.

Re:Thems fightin words..... (5, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443692)

If the US moves Wikileaks on the list of terrorist organizations, I move the US on my list of fascist nations.

Did they pocket the donation money? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443468)

I recall reading here that since Paypal isn't a bank, that they get to do lots of very questionable things with your money in the paypal account. Is it likely they did the same thing here?

Re:Did they pocket the donation money? (2)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443730)

I recall reading here that since Paypal isn't a bank, that they get to do lots of very questionable things with your money in the paypal account. Is it likely they did the same thing here?

I don't see how. They are, after all, refusing to accept Wikileaks supporters' money, so there is no means for financial gain. I suspect someone at PayPal might be thinking ahead to avoid civil or criminal lawsuits ("providing assistance to terrorists"?). I'm not saying this position is legally right or wrong, but I can understand why they might think Wilikeaks' business might present more trouble than it's worth.

Incidentally, I take issue with the claim in the summary that "most knowledgeable on-line users will have been refusing to use them [PayPal, that is] for years for a wide variety of abusive practices". Most of these cases appear to stem directly from many people's practice of treating PayPal as a bank, when its main purpose is to provide a convenient means for transferring funds. If I were a shopkeeper who left months' worth of takings sitting in the till, I would have nobody to blame but myself if someone came along and stole them. If you have funds worth keeping, it makes sense to put them somewhere where you can be reasonably confident of finding them again. I would never consider an unregulated website, hosted offshore, as such a repository. However, PayPal is a superb way of transferring funds from one individual to another.

Wow. (4, Insightful)

phyrexianshaw.ca (1265320) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443472)

well, Guess it's time to close that account then.

what a bunch of bullshit. I'm getting so tired of the the divide that's developing.

Re:Wow. (4, Insightful)

Voline (207517) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443542)

The divide has always been there. It is just now becoming visible.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443644)

I also just closed my account. I let them know why. Feels good man.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443686)

Sure you did. Liar.

Re:Wow. (2)

Sirusjr (1006183) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443724)

Why would I stop using a great service that provides me moderate protection in my online transactions simply because they do something I don't like? That is like ignoring movies of an actor you enjoy just because he does something stupid in his private life. The two are completely unrelated and to deprive yourself of the pleasure in protest makes no difference but simply makes you feel better.

Re:Wow. (0)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443838)

No, it's not like that at all. What an idiotic comparison.

Re: Wow (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443774)

If Wikileaks is encouraging people to take confidential information from their employers (corporate espionage) so they can post it AND Paypal has a policy that you cannot use a paypal account if you are encouraging people to break the law, what is the issue. If Wikileaks was the only company that paypal enforced this policy on, that would be one thing, but they have done it a number of times.

Paypal is not make a political statement, it is only enforcing it's own clearly stated policies. Mastercard, VISA and American Express all have the same policy, although Wikileaks didn't use them to solicit donation. So, if you are going to close your paypal account, you should also cancel all your credit cards, too.

Why would these pay systems do that? Could be that if Wikileaks is found to be violating the laws of some country or another that they (Paypal, credit cards, etc.) could be held liable for funnelling funds to them. Loosing a few accounts from people acting emotionally is a whole lot less painful than loosing millions in fines or being banned from operating in that country.

The good news about all of this, however, is that Wikileaks has risen to enough of threat/source (depending on how you look at it) that others are taking notice. However, that is a two edged sword because now they are being placed under the same public scrutiny that they subject others to.

Innocent until proven guilty? (3, Insightful)

sunderland56 (621843) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443476)

It is surprising, watching the entire WikiLeaks controversy, how quickly American corporations discard the concepts and ideals of the American constitution.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443522)

Corporate citizenship went out of style back around 1980.

"Greed is good" and all that.

--
BMO

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (2)

cob666 (656740) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443540)

The presumption of innocence only applies in a criminal proceeding if I'm not mistaken. A corporation has every right to terminate a business relationship for whatever reason they want.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443588)

That's why a small corrupt government in league with big corrupt corporations to run (ruin?) your country can actually be worse than a big corrupt government that still has to pretend to follow the US Constitution and laws.

If most of the roads were owned by corporations and you had to have an account to use them (tolls etc), you won't be traveling very far when they terminate their business relationship with you.

Same if you started getting more Company Towns.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (0)

profke (546335) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443546)

Why is that surprising? The American government did the same with GitMo. The American public does the same with the 'mosque on ground zero'. (Which is neither a mosque, nor on ground zero...) America has seased to be a hallmark for democracy (or civilization for that matter) a long time ago... (Not, BTW, that there are many countries out there that fit the bill...)

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (-1, Flamebait)

dwillden (521345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443566)

Since when do the ideals and concepts of the American Constitution require anyone or any business to do business with an entity at war with our country. Wikileaks has declared war on the US government. They are not pointing out specific wrong doings but are indiscriminately exposing our operational secrets, the ones that every country has and operates with.

Please note that the nations of the world are not ticked at the US for the contents of the leaked cables, but at Wikileaks for leaking the cables, and the embarrassing information contained in them.

I for one applaud Amazon and Paypal for not being part of this continuing attack on our nation. If they were revealing specific wrong doings that would be another thing, but they are not.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (5, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443598)

Wikileaks is at war with your country now? Did you just declare the "War against Freedom of the Press"(TM)? Would fit in well with the War on Terrorism(TM) and the War on Drugs(TM).

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (5, Informative)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443616)

They are not pointing out specific wrong doings

They are, in fact, pointing out wrong doings.

(1) the U.S. military formally adopted a policy of turning a blind eye [guardian.co.uk] to systematic, pervasive torture and other abuses by Iraqi forces;

(2)theState Department threatened Germany not to criminally investigate [harpers.org] the CIA's kidnapping of one of its citizens who turned out to be completely innocent [boingboing.net] ;

(3) the StateDepartment under Bush andObama applied continuous pressure on the Spanish Government [harpers.org] to suppress investigations of the CIA's torture of its citizens and the 2003 killing of a Spanish photojournalist when the U.S. military fired on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad (see ThePhiladelphia Inquirer's WillBunch today about this:"The day BarackObama Lied to me [philly.com] ");

(4) the British Government privately promised to shield Bush officials from embarrassment [telegraph.co.uk] as part of its Iraq War "investigation";

(5) there were at least 15,000 people killed in Iraq that were previously uncounted [reuters.com] ;

(6) "American leaders lied, knowingly, to the American public, to American troops, and to the world" about the Iraq war as it was prosecuted, a conclusion the Post's own former Baghdad Bureau Chief wrote was proven by theWikiLeaks documents [thedailybeast.com] ;

(7)the U.S.'s own Ambassador concluded that the July, 2009 removal of the Honduran President was illegal -- a coup -- [lrb.co.uk] but the StateDepartment did not want to conclude that and thus ignored it until it was too late to matter;

(8) U.S. and British officials colluded to allow theU.S. to keep cluster bombs on British soil [guardian.co.uk] even though Britain had signed the treaty banning such weapons, and,

(9)Hillary Clinton's State Department ordered diplomats [guardian.co.uk] to collect passwords, emails, and biometric data on U.N. and other foreign officials, almost certainly in violation of the Vienna Treaty of 1961.

(TotH to GG [salon.com] , as usual.) I appreciate why you believe what you wrote. You might want to reconsider your position given your primary source of news is from organizations whose allegiance is to parent corporations that, like Amazon, absolutely cannot afford to get on the wrong side of the government that regulates them.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (1)

Dasuraga (1147871) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443720)

It's not wikileaks that's actually doing the pointing. They just dump their information onto the net.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (2)

Barsteward (969998) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443712)

What bollox.... Government officials are paid for by your taxes (i presume you pay your taxes) so the information belongs to you.I prefer to know what my government officials are really saying rather than the crap they push out on the air waves and in news print.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (-1, Flamebait)

dwillden (521345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443820)

You have zero need to have this information. Revealing this information hinders our ability to conduct international diplomacy, which prevents wars. When nations have no secrets to negotiate with they have little recourse but war.

And where in the constitution does it say all information obtained or created by the government belongs to the people. This is a popular meme on the internet but there is no historical precedence for it.

Re:Innocent until proven guilty? (2)

electron sponge (1758814) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443604)

It is surprising, watching the entire WikiLeaks controversy, how quickly American corporations discard the concepts and ideals of the American constitution.

Which concepts and ideals in the American constitution are being discarded by corporations? Since when do we expect corporations to be the source of, or protector of, our constitutional liberties, anyway?

Source? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443482)

"most knowledgeable on-line users will have been refusing to use them for years "

While it's true that paypal generates animosity for some, I still think that the above statement requires a source before putting it in the article summary like it's a fact.

Re:Source? (3, Informative)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443574)

"PayPal's move is unlikely to result in many more people boycotting the company, as most knowledgeable on-line users will have been refusing to use them for years for a wide variety of abusive practices."

On a related note, there is a difference between boycotting many of their other targets and Wikileaks. Many of the earlier bad behavior was targeted at sites most people didn't know about or care very strongly about (IIRC), whereas this is a very controversial issue for most US citizens, and others across the globe. I think we can expect numerous current PayPal users to stop using them, and others who have never used them to start, as this is a very polarizing issue. For the record, I hope most people stop using them, but my already crushed hope that most US citizens understand basic elementary school civics makes me less than certain what the outcome will be overall for PayPal.

Just fucking google it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443652)

You require a source? Search for it yourself.

Re:Source? (1)

zephvark (1812804) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443718)

Apparently, "most knowledgeable on-line users" have developed photosynthetic skin and no longer need to eat. I'm quite aware of the dubious business practices of PayPal but, they own the universal money transfer market. If you can do better, build that thing and make your fortune. In the meantime, boycotting PayPal is a fine luxury for the sea-kitten crowd.

Re:Source? (0)

faedle (114018) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443760)

There are other companies doing what PayPal does. Squareup and Google Checkout just to name two.

Nobody _HAS_ to use PayPal.

Dangerous (2)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443486)

Yes, it's always dangerous to do business with large companies like Amazon or Paypal that aggressively try to obtain a monopoly in their market, because these kind of companies usually give a shit about individual customers. For my shareware I've been using Kagi from the start and never had any problem with them.

But I must confess that I'm still using Amazon S3 for my backups. (I wonder what happens if I upload a copy of the cable leaks in unencrypted form? Will my account be canceled without prior notice and all my backups be gone?)

Question: Can anyone recommend a reasonably prized alternative to the S3/Jungledisk combo?

Re:Dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443654)

SpiderOak offers pretty decent prices on high-latency network storage, which is good for backups.

Re:Dangerous (2)

ThoughtMonster (1602047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443684)

http://www.backblaze.com/ [backblaze.com]

You may remember them from this post [backblaze.com] on their blog where they provide a detailed description of their technical setup. Their services are excellent, IMO.

Re:Dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443700)

I honestly don't know what S3/Jungledisk is, but I've tested this for backup purposes:

https://spideroak.com/

I liked the concept but found the client somewhat difficult to use. I also got confused about how you can share your data without giving them the ability to decrypt your content. I've since replaced my computer and haven't looked into cloud backup since.

Yes. See how economy and freedom are entangled (4, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443492)

There were idiots believing there could be freedom with full feudalism (capitalism) being allowed in the economic side of life, and democracy and equality in the political side of life.

See how that works ? you are free to say anything you want, from the political side, but, you dont have the MEANS to say it from the economic side.

basically, the corporations which dominate the economic side, determine how far your freedom goes. it doesnt matter ZIT whether you are allowed full freedoms in the political side of life.

its stupid anyway - you let everyone be free and equal, but, you give the control of the means to exercise those freedoms to the most wealthy. what did you think would happen ?

this ....

Re:Yes. See how economy and freedom are entangled (1)

maztuhblastah (745586) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443630)

There were idiots believing there could be freedom with full feudalism (capitalism) being allowed in the economic side of life, and democracy and equality in the political side of life.

See how that works ? you are free to say anything you want, from the political side, but, you dont have the MEANS to say it from the economic side.

You know, I never thought about how oppressed we really were until your post on this commercial, advertising-supported Web site cleared it up for me.

Grow up and get some perspective.

Re:Yes. See how economy and freedom are entangled (5, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443676)

You know, I never thought about how oppressed we really were until your post on this commercial, advertising-supported Web site cleared it up for me.

Grow up and get some perspective.

oh geee !!! now i see the error of my ways ..

so, if we were back in slavery days, and slave in a plantation owners' farm, and talking at night in the log cabin that the plantation owner stuffed us into, while eating the food that plantation owner had given us, it would be totally wrong if i said 'hey, we are slaves here, we have no freedom' ??

would you say, 'you know, i never thought about how oppressed we really were until your talk in this slaveowner-sponsored log cabin, eating this slave-owner sponsored meal', in that sarcastic manner ?

wake up and dont be an idiot.

It has always been true (3, Interesting)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443672)

Freedom of publication. But can you afford to pay for the press, the ink, the distribution?

Freedom of broadcasting. But can you afford the license fee for the frequency, the cost of powering the transmitter?

Freedom to gather. But can you afford to take a day of work, the travel expenses? Can you get a meeting place?

The chains of oppression are never more powerful then when those chains are of our own making. We make the super-companies and gave them the power to control society. Google dictates what you can put on a website, oh you can pay for bandwidth yourself but who can afford to pay for a DDOS attack traffic? So you get google ads and abide by their content laws or you get the money elsewhere.

Through paypal donations? Only when PayPal approves.

The proof? Boobies. There is no need for congress to ban boobies on TV, self regulation does it already. How nice. But it goes further. Just how do you get something published on TV if the powers that be do not want it? Oh, you might be able to get it on some tiny channel but then the fast majority will never see it.

Mission accomplished.

The conspiracy theory nuts never think devious enough. They fear jackbooted thugs marching down the street when it is so much simpler to simply let it be known that an action would displease you and all the little puppets spring into action to prevent the risk that this displeasement might come on their necks. I could whip you into obeying my orders, or I could make you fear you won't have a job tomorrow with which to pay your credit card debt. I can only whip one person at a time. I can ruin thousands of lives by just signing a simple piece of paper except that the fear means I never have to do it to get you and your masters to obey.

We are seeing now in action what western democracy has become. And nothing will change. Because our masters have replaced the whip with credit card payments, mortages and Idols. The romans would have been proud. To bad they are gone, bread and circusses didn't work out to well for us. Doubt it will for us.

Wonder what the Chinese are making of all this. They seen the romans rice and fall, are we just another empire to die as the Chinese empire continues?

Re:It has always been true (2)

danfromsb (965115) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443746)

Freedom of publication. But can you afford to pay for the press, the ink, the distribution?

Freedom of broadcasting. But can you afford the license fee for the frequency, the cost of powering the transmitter?

Freedom to gather. But can you afford to take a day of work, the travel expenses? Can you get a meeting place?

This is not a case of wikileaks not being able to afford services, this is a case of wikileaks being denied services from private companies due to political pressure on those companies.

Re:Yes. See how economy and freedom are entangled (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443768)

"basically, the corporations which dominate the economic side, determine how far your freedom goes. it doesnt matter ZIT whether you are allowed full freedoms in the political side of life."

most bills passed are written by cooperations.......

Once a smart guy said, " we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" , nobody cared since he was on the way out and now some 50 years later, its controlling every aspects of American life and with regular intervals seeks to justify itself by libirating a country, not just to use the armed wing of the complex, but also make way for the market needed of constant growth.

Think about it, constant growth, its impossible, yet everybody say its the only way !

Economic rights are civil rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443824)

That is why so many of us believe in property rights, the rights to the fruits of our labors and the right to freely trade with others.

Others believe that rights like this always lead to plutocracy so they advocate for government regulation of the economic sphere to protect us from the evil corporations and give everyone a "living" wage as such. What we get is more government power and a concentration of corporate power beyond what they might get in a free market.

I suspect you would have advocated for most of these powers and regulations that lead to shittier outcomes for all.
 

Skip paypal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443496)

Paypal might be useful if you want to send money to someone you don't trust.
I trust wikileaks with my money more than I trust paypal so I can donate money to them directly, paypal is not needed for that.

Re:Skip paypal (2, Funny)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443534)

I don't know, I donated to Wikileaks once, and then the following week a package of over 10,000 of my private emails, credit card numbers, social security numbers, etc, was leaked and republished in the New York Times and Guardian Newspaper.

Never again...

It took this long? (3, Interesting)

owlnation (858981) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443524)

I'm surprised, I'd have thought Paypal would have been the first to cut ties. Especially considering their connection to Meg Whitman.

Though, this is probably a good thing. Considering Paypal's reputation and standing, Paypal is a company that Wikileaks should have been publishing documents about, rather than using as a payment partner.

Re:It took this long? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443710)

Meg Whitman? Wow, tinfoil hattery shows no bounds.

Re:It took this long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443776)

Wikileaks is using PayPal precisely because it wants them to act this way, so later they can say 'see what I mean?'.

Re:It took this long? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443786)

I would have thought this would be unnecessary, given that complainants against PayPal are not bound by any Official Secrets legislation, and are free to air their grievances to anyone who will listen. A quick Google search will find any number of such complaints. (As I mentioned in an earlier post, however, if one uses PayPal solely for its original stated purpose of transferring funds between individuals, there doesn't seem to be that much to complain about.)

backfire (3, Insightful)

Danathar (267989) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443528)

I think there is a real possibility that the more they stamp down on wikileaks the more people are likely to support it. You don't need paypal to get donations. Unless the government is going to open mail and remove checks (I suppose that COULD happen) wikileaks will get support.

As for the Web site, copies of it will float around forever in bittorrent, question is,...will we see wikileaks move completely over to something like freenet (which it has not done but it is being mirrored by 3rd party individuals on freenet)

Re:backfire (1)

Jrono (470199) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443678)

Actually, that has happened before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 [wikipedia.org] "The Act also gave the Postmaster General authority to refuse to mail or to impound publications that he determined to be in violation of its prohibitions"

This is a good business opportunity (2, Interesting)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443550)

This has suddenly become an excellent business opportunity to any company that wants free publicity and wishes to get a chunk of Paypal's business. It only needs to contact wikileaks and offer their regular service, along with an assurance that they won't cancel the account. That, alone, will contrast with Paypal's notorious appalling business behaviour, which systematically lets their paying customers hang out to dry.

So, care to put your money where your mouth is, alertpay and co ?

Bitcoin (1)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443554)

Use Bitcoin [bitcoin.org] (at least until they outlaw it)

I placed a demand with paypal. (4, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443578)

I have demanded that they reinstate wikileaks account, and noted that i would migrate my business from paypal to other means, and also advise my ecommerce clients to do as such too. In addition, because im in the Eu zone, i have filed my complaint under 'file a complaint in the european union'.

i have also stated that i was going to file an official complaint with the European Parliament regarding the matter, unless the account is not reinstated. As a citizen of a candidate country, i have that right. Any citizen of any member or candidate country, has that right. If you file your complaint properly with your name, address, it is processed by Eu Parl even if it is by email.

take action.

i said, i didnt want to do business with a corporation that caves into the pressure of a single senator from a single country. Let paypal show its international, if it wants to do business internationally.

Re:I placed a demand with paypal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443612)

I closed my Paypal account today. When you do you get the option to tell them why, which I did.

Re:I placed a demand with paypal. (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443624)

Hmm.. I might consider that. On what grounds did you file the complaint? Unfair business practices under the EU competition law?

Re:I placed a demand with paypal. (2)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443708)

Freedom of information, or unfair business practices, or anything. tell them, these are happening just because of political pressure in a country that this service is based in. this service is caving to that pressure, affecting the freedom of people that are living in eu.

if they want to do business in eu, they have to abide by eu regulations.

you can file your petition here :

https://www.secure.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/petition/secured/submit.do?language=EN [europa.eu]

Downside of Cloud Computing? (2)

coolmadsi (823103) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443594)

That last line in the summary seems to be implying a big negative reason for adopting cloud computing.

booooooo (1)

revxul (463513) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443610)

Booooooooo

In your face. (4, Informative)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443614)

Doing that wasnt on my mind even. Thanks, whichever moron, has pressurized paypal to suspend them. They made me donate to wikileaks.

Thank you for your donation.

Your payment of EUR 25 has been received 4.12.2010 16:02:31
With your VISA xxxxxxxxxxxx9516
Reference : 5729


The Wikileaks Team, Sunshine Press

whats going on? (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443660)

I dunno if you've noticed lately but:
A. The government is taking down domain names without warrants
B. The government is pressuring hosts to remove services
C. The government is encouraging if not mandating ISP to throttle bit torrents
D. The government is tracking US citizens Via their Credit cards, telephone conversations, Internet traffic and cellphones without warrants.
E. All sorts of other nefarious things we aren't aware of yet...

Seriously, this is turning into a bad Oliver Stone movie.

Re:whats going on? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443840)

Seriously, this is turning into a bad Oliver Stone movie.

Except this is real, and you're in it. Do something about it, or get ready for the end credits.

Pay Anonymously (1)

jimktrains (838227) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443690)

I wish there was a way to pay anonymously without having to go through a single company. There is always bitcoins, I guess, but that's not a perfect answer I feel.

"Open source freedom fighter" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34443704)

C'mon, who are the ones feeding propaganda here? Why do idiot extremists (U.S. government) always turn out idiot extremists of the opposite persuasion (F/OSS evangelists)? How about using the neutral term "OSS advocate" or something that sounds less ridiculous, and not a term that brings to mind actual visionaries... you know, the kind who dedicated their lives so that others could live: the kind who actually lost their lives. Benefiting geek culture during spare hours of the night... is not noteworthy.

oh (3, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443798)

you know, the kind who dedicated their lives so that others could live: the kind who actually lost their lives.

you mean, the ones who lost their lives while propagating invasions, occupations so that american corporations can create mandates and get access to resources ?

in NO war after world war ii, there has been a situation in which american soldiers were dying for defending freedom and preventing oppression. in ALL situations, and that includes somalia, they were sent to those places to further private interests's aims in the region. Any zone either had strategic resources (panama canal, middle east), or, natural resources (somalia, middle east, oil).

Paypal alternatives for professionals & busine (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443722)

It is rather easy if you are using paypal for only personal purposes, but it is hard for any kind of web service provider, like websites, or web developers or other small businesses and professionals. It is so because paypal is widely accepted.

So, what other alternatives are there for paypal, for people who are engaged in such industries professionally ? can anyone give a clue ?

Welcome to the corporate internet (2)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443750)

I guess this is the time when the veil's opened and we realize that the web designed by Tim Berners-Lee, is dead.

The Internet has stopped being the land of free-speech as we know it. At any time that corporate or government interests are against free speech, they just hit the political off-switch. If someone decides to install internet routers and domain systems in another country, expect that country to be labelled "terrorist" and invaded by those with power.

Expect peer-to-peer information sources and services to be outlawed. Guess the cyberpunks authors got it right after all.

criminal/terrorist/etc (2)

anonieuweling (536832) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443796)

So, exposing what a criminal/terrorist/etc government does make YOU an criminal/terrorist/etc, at least in the eyes of Paypal, Inc.

Petition European Parliament (3, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443816)

Paypal is basically discriminating against an entity/person based in European Union, based on political pressure in united states.

United states, is not in european union.

Petition european parliament at the below url via their online form, or, mail your petition to the address below and ask European Parliament look into the practices of Paypal in european union, and take action against their holdings in Eu, if they are found in violation. If they are to do business in European union, they have to abide by its rules and regulations.

https://www.secure.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/petition/secured/submit.do?language=EN [europa.eu]

Committee on Petitions
The Secretariat
Rue Wiertz
B-1047 Brussels

Were they pushed? (1)

korimako (1952872) | more than 3 years ago | (#34443818)

Looking forward to someone at PayPal leaking the emails from the Secretary of State threatening to charge PayPal with aiding terrorism if they don't stop providing a donation button to Wikileaks.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...