Beta
×

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!

WikiLeaks Continues To Fund Itself Via Flattr

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the money-finds-a-way dept.

Censorship 194

novenator writes "Since the corporations MasterCard, PayPal, and Visa have been trying to shut down the cash flow to the Wikileaks project, those who wish to donate have been having trouble finding a way to help out. The social media/micropayment site Flattr (run from Sweden) continues to leave the channels open."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

News For Nerds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629356)

Can we stop posting every bit wikileaks minutiae and get back to real news for nerds?

  wikileaks almost has nothing to do with tech anyways, and this tidbit is almost certainly not stuff that matters.

Re:News For Nerds (0)

devbox (1919724) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629406)

It's not like Flattr is immune to Visa/Mastercard control anyway. As soon as they tell Paypal and Moneybookers (or they act on their own) to shut them down, they will, and there's not much Flattr can do about it.

Re:News For Nerds (3, Insightful)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629410)

Can we stop posting every bit wikileaks minutiae and get back to real news for nerds?

wikileaks almost has nothing to do with tech anyways, and this tidbit is almost certainly not stuff that matters.

Can we report on more ways to help Wikileaks please? It is arguably the most influence technology, hacking and open-source thinking has had this year, and for a while, and I'd like to see it gather much more support.

Hey, this news is only 1.5 weeks late (0)

arcite (661011) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629630)

This is why I come to Slashdot. To stay current. We nerds need to be up-to-date.

Re:Hey, this news is only 1.5 weeks late (3, Insightful)

caluml (551744) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630346)

So can you point us at your submission on the subject then?

Re:News For Nerds (5, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629756)

Can we report on more ways to help Wikileaks please?

What I'd like to see is an open, international credit card system that's not at the mercy of two semi-monopolists. It's practically impossible to do reliable payments online without the approval of MasterCard and Visa, and clearly they don't always approve. That's a problem, and it needs to be fixed. We've become too dependent on these two companies, and it turns out they're not the neutral infrastructure that we expected them to be.

We need neutral payment infrastructure. Preferably one where the recipient doesn't need a separate contract with every single credit card company, but only with a single bank. And then everybody with a credit card can automatically pay money to that bank. You can have multiple banks, multiple credit cards, etc, all on the same universal, open system. And if a single bank decides not to do business with you, then you can simply switch to another. If your credit card provider decides not to let you send money to someone, you can just get a different credit card that's on the same system. It's the only good way of handling this, I think.

Now only to get some international banks and credit cards on board with this idea.

Re:News For Nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34630118)

Bitcoins serve exactly this purpose. See www.bitcoin.org

Re:News For Nerds (1)

Schadrach (1042952) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631996)

It also needs to be able to be exchanged for local currency, or for goods and services directly, which is where bitcoin fails, isn't it?

Re:News For Nerds (1)

lwsimon (724555) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632176)

You can freely exchange bitcoins for USD - there are operating currency exchanges, though their volume is quite low.

I believe going rate is something like 1 bitcoin = USD 0.25.

Re:News For Nerds (3, Informative)

xaxa (988988) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630154)

Isn't that what the various inter-bank electronic transfer systems do? I can transfer money to any UK account for free, and any account worldwide for a fee. The fee (£10 or so) is so high I've never used it though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWIFT [wikipedia.org]

Of course, these aren't anonymous, and as I understand it most banks charge for transactions in a different currency and/or country.

Using the online form linked from here [wikileaks.ch] ("Online Transfer via selected European and UK banks") should use this system, but doesn't work with either of my accounts -- I think because they're both in £ but the destination account is in €.

The Assange Defence Fund is held in a UK £ account (details at the top of the Support page), so I can donate to that easily (the same way I pay my rent, etc). But I'd rather donate to Wikileaks.

Re:News For Nerds (4, Insightful)

contrapunctus (907549) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630852)

i seem to remember the US keeps track of swift "for terrorism" reasons
who is to say i won't get flagged if i use swift to help wikileaks?...

if the goal is oppression by fear, then it's working.

Re:News For Nerds (2)

eth1 (94901) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632672)

i seem to remember the US keeps track of swift "for terrorism" reasons
who is to say i won't get flagged if i use swift to help wikileaks?...

if the goal is oppression by fear, then it's working.

This was my thought, too. They'll just classify it as a "terrorist organization," so it doesn't matter how you send money to them, you'll still be arrestable.

Re:News For Nerds (5, Insightful)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631252)

Naive as I sometimes am I used to believe that major credit card companies like Visa or Mastercard are obliged to process transactions, unless there is no well-defined court ruling against it, and cannot just refuse to deliver their services whenever they feel like it or are under political pressure. Personally, I don't give a damn about the cables and don't understand why the US government makes such a fuzz about them -- most of what they contain is known by everyone, and besides, personal assessments by diplomats are not facts anyway.

But it is astonishing and came as quite a surprise to me that essential economic services like money transfers and payment processing sites are apparently allowed to be operated by private companies in an arbitrary and unreliable way and can easily be influenced by governments to their will without legal consequences. I'd say there is an urgent need for neutrality rules in the form of laws and binding international treaties.

Re:News For Nerds (1)

Schadrach (1042952) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632058)

Wikileaks isn't the first case of VISA/MC refusing to process transactions without a court order to such effect. Particularly "unusual" parts of the porn industry have had to deal with that at one point or another. I'd be willing to bet there are at least a few instances of that going on right now, if you get weird/disturbing enough with your porn. Enough for "gross factor" (whether their own or that of another, larger customer) to outpace "income from this customer", to be specific.

Re:News For Nerds (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632632)

Now only to get some international banks and credit cards on board with this idea.

Won't happen. The major players will just get their respective governments to shut them down, bury them in bureaucratic red tape. There are no existing banks that will challenge the power..

On a related note, see how Ticketmaster controls venues for big live events.

Since when is posting a file online "technology"? (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629784)

Well , ok it uses technology - admittedly from 1991 - but I don't think thats quite what you meant.

And , what exactly is "open source thinking"? Other people get to peer into your mind and amend your thoughts for you if they don't look right? Isn't that what the CIA and KGB/FSB are supposed to do?

Re:Since when is posting a file online "technology (2)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630050)

Well , ok it uses technology - admittedly from 1991 - but I don't think thats quite what you meant.

And , what exactly is "open source thinking"?

The posting is not the technology part, it's the social impact part. The technology part is exercised by whoever acquired the documents, and the technical ability to keep the site free of attacks and running.

Open source thinking stands for giving everyone access to all information, for full transparency, whether that's inside the box, under the hood, under the table, behind the curtain, behind the firewall, but most especially, inside the secret dealings of corrupt, powerful, monopolist, abusive and violent entities, such as many sections of goverenments and corporations.

But it appears you stand for their rights to abuse human beings, laws and ethics codes of all lands, in complete secrecy. So I understand why you don't agree.

Governments take down Website (4, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629804)

I think the more interesting point here, is that governments can strong-arm credit card companies to cut the funding for a Website that they don't like.

What happens if an influential large software company decides that it doesn't like an open source software site?

This is indeed news for nerds, and stuff that matters.

Re:News For Nerds (4, Interesting)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629862)

Big news for nerds in Spain today [google.com] has got Spanish "internautas"riled: The US pressured all major political parties to change Spanish laws regarding P2P downloads.

Specifically: these two cables (248887 [elpais.com] and 213345 [elpais.com] ) are revealing the backroom pressure to ignore the wishes of the Spanish people and slip the laws in without any debate. Even going as far as to tell elected representatives not to meet with the internet community to debate the issue.

This, right on the heels of a votation without public debate going on right now in congress to force through new laws giving the Spanish Gov the right to shutdown websites at will without so much as a court order...

Re:News For Nerds (3, Informative)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632770)

Actually, after actually reading the cables, it appears that it wasn't the US pressuring anybody.

Re:News For Nerds (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630156)

Can we stop posting every bit wikileaks minutiae and get back to real news for nerds?

  wikileaks almost has nothing to do with tech anyways, and this tidbit is almost certainly not stuff that matters.

Can we report on more ways to help Wikileaks please?

Can you stop feeding the trolls?

Every thread has a troll in it saying "this is not news for nerd/stuff that matters", they should simply be routinely downmodded and ignored.

Re:News For Nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34630338)

It is arguably the most influence technology, hacking and open-source thinking has had this year

Wikileaks has *nothing* to do with any of those things. Hell, they're not even a wiki anymore.

Re:News For Nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34631654)

I'm helping however I can. I had in the past been looking into getting a flattr account before this whole cable release started. I was just waiting for it to get more prevalant in Canada, or North America as a whole.

The Wikileaks thing however got me to sign up for it a lot sooner than I otherwise would have. Hope my donations help them push through this further.

Although I hope openleaks gets a flattr account too... I could split my donations between them (and the few other things I happen to flattr).

Re:News For Nerds (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629454)

Can we stop posting every bit wikileaks minutiae and get back to real news for nerds?

And if we do post it, let's pos it while it's still news, and not a week later, okay?

wikileaks almost has nothing to do with tech anyways, and this tidbit is almost certainly not stuff that matters.

Blocking online transactions has something to do with your rights online, though. And that's where this story is.

Re:News For Nerds (1)

dogsbreath (730413) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629730)

Can we stop posting every bit wikileaks minutiae and get back to real news for nerds?

  wikileaks almost has nothing to do with tech anyways, and this tidbit is almost certainly not stuff that matters.

Don't be daft. Wikileaks is a major story in the news and internet technology made it possible and continues to enable it. The story is fascinating in many ways, including potential technology measures and counter measures (eg: domain shut downs). Much of what we read here does not make it to the mainstream news sites or the spin on it changes. Some of the minutiae is a little much but certainly some people must want to see it or it would not have been modded up on submission.

Besides, you can always pick some story you are tired of reading about and pick on it. Me, I could care less about games and all of the foofarah around releases, reviews, etc. Obviously many others do care so more power to them. Skipping a story is easy --- just don't open it/read it. If you want to change things then go do some firehose rating.

Re:News For Nerds (-1, Troll)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630408)

Slashdot has long stopped being a technology forum. Approximately half the articles on the front page right now are purely political and not just under YRO. There is a labor dispute story under Hardware section. People like to give their juvenile political opinions, that's where ad impressions are.

We already know that. (0)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629362)

Is this a way of reminding people to donate ?

Re:We already know that. (2)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630062)

I actually had no idea, I thought the only way to donate to Wikleaks right now was via Xipwire.

this the first I have heard of it (2)

Presto Vivace (882157) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630548)

and I wonder what effect it will have on Flattr brand. Will it be the making of it? Will it bring it to the notice of people who would otherwise never have heard of it?

Right on. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629376)

Go WikiLeaks! The Champion of Democracy and Freedom!!

Time to close Flattr account... (-1, Troll)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629388)

And don't give me this "Freedom of speech" bull. Mastercard, Visa, PayPal, Amazon and many others who got DDOS'ed have the freedom of speech to shut down their services to anyone they choose to. After all, they are not the government corporation.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (-1, Troll)

MichaelKristopeit304 (1962656) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629460)

mastercard and visa are more entwined in the treasury department and process more USD transactions than any other government corporation.

there are also a slew of anti-trust issues you're conveniently and hypocritically ignoring.

time to close your life account... you're an idiot.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (-1, Troll)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629766)

I would like to choose to respond to your assertion about USD transactions and your ignoring the fact that every single bank and financial institution do government transactions all over the world for every single government including the two biggest credit companies but never mind. Instead I would like to put a mirror against your face to show how much of a stupid idiot you actually are after the following trolling quotes:

time to close your life account... you're an idiot.

my address is 4513 brittany ct. eau claire, wi. 54701. my house is solid. your house is??? why do you cower? what are you afraid of? you're completely pathetic. ur mum's face choose to have Down's Syndrome. you're an idiot.

you are NOTHING. cower behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb. you're completely pathetic.

You know, there are two types of attitudes in the world. There are those who believe that in order to make oneself happy one has to make others happy as well. And the other attitude is of course, in order to make oneself feel happy one has to make others feel bad. Quite vampiric attitude, actually. And since your attitude obviously belongs to the second category I would wholeheartedly urge you to see a shrink as soon as possible because it is a self-destructive path that you are on, and you seriously in need of some anti-depressant medications.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (-1, Flamebait)

MichaelKristopeit305 (1962658) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630022)

a series of individual banks is less than a worldwide conglomerate... especially considering most banks CONTRACT the conglomerate for services they themselves individually could not possibly provide.

there are idiots that choose to spread idiocy, and there are those that would call them an idiot.

you're an idiot.

what is your address? do you own a home? how can the person responsible for your ignorant lies be contacted? do you take responsibility for you actions?

you're completely pathetic.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629560)

After all, they are not the government corporation.

If that's true, why is the U.S. government pressuring foreign nations to not allow competing services and only allow Mastercard and Visa to process payments? Or are you so blind to the concept of freed information that you don't even bother to read what has been leaked?

Legal clauses please. (5, Insightful)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629620)

Let's deny you all credit cards, bank accounts, airline flights, all major store purchases, all corporate relations, because, well, just because the government said so, no arguments given, and see if you still call that a right any company has, and not a restriction of your freedoms, based on discrimination of some sort. Nobody has yet even accuse wikileaks of breaking any law. The data they publish was not acquired by them, and could have been published anywhere, in zillions of methods, including leaflets on street light poles, involving no computer or network of any kind.

Re:Legal clauses please. (1)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629888)

Errr ... tell me how it sounds. An American bank financing a person ingaging in violation of Espionage Act of 1917... And seriously -- they, as private companies have a right to deny their services to whom they choose. Once upon a time I used to work for a pizza store. My coworker (a black guy) was told by a customer to serve him a pizza, and the customer also called him by a racial slur. I took his pizza in front of him, told him I am refusing to serve it to him and threw it in the trash. The law is on my side (again) because I have the right to whom I choose to accept as customers and whom I do not.

Re:Legal clauses please. (4, Interesting)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630052)

They aren't guilty of the Espionage Act. They haven't even been officially charged with anything. It's questionable if they even can be charged under the act (since they do/may-fall-under the journalism exception). So far they are in exactly the same legal situation Intel is over spying on US intelligence: none.

There is lots of saber-rattling and threats; but no charges. Thus they can't be guilty. Arguably, there are no charges because then they could be proved innocent, where as right now they're basically stuck as "we assume they're guilty" unless for push for a court to say otherwise (directed verdict?).

Re:Legal clauses please. (1)

lwsimon (724555) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632202)

Assange isn't a US citizen, and thus is not subject to US law.

Re:Legal clauses please. (1)

ezzzD55J (697465) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631444)

An American bank financing a person ingaging in violation of Espionage Act of 1917

The bank isn't financing.

Re:Legal clauses please. (4, Insightful)

Schadrach (1042952) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632218)

So, we need to cut off all payment to the New York Times et al, as they are equally connected to the documents in question, yes? Oh, wait, that was tried against the times wrt the Pentagon Papers. Here's the real question -- other than being a smaller and potentially squelchable organization who is almost certainly not in bed with any of the organizations that would be made to look bad, how does Wikileaks differ from the Times? Remember, you are about to set a clear line about what point something is or is not considered journalism, and it will come back to bite you in the most horrible manner possible.

Re:Legal clauses please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34632394)

Technically, 18 U.S.C. 793(e) apparently says:

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, (etc. etc.) relating to the national defense, ... (which) the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates (etc. etc) the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same (etc) ...
"Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

So merely unauthorized possession is a criminal act. Whether that law is constitutional or not is, sadly, another story.

The fact we have so many laws we don't even know what they all say, and can seemingly find a random one to pull out for use at any individual at will in any situation, I think is the much bigger problem.

Look, I don't like Assange - I think he's an anti-American jerk, but that's not illegal.
Making his life miserable with these lawless and underhanded methods (is anyone actually stupid enough to believe those charges against him?) is by far worse than anything he's done. The government bastards that are pulling the strings and trying to shut down wikileaks should be found and criminally prosecuted for abuse of power.

Re:Legal clauses please. (0)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632638)

It seems odd that while slashdoters argue that the US has become fascist, at the same time, they argue that corporate freedoms are in jeopardy.

As for "The data they publish was not acquired by them..." They maybe didn't pay for it, but I'm pretty sure they acquired it somehow. Otherwise, how could they publish it?

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (2)

EyeSavant (725627) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629682)

In terms of Mastercard and Visa, I would say it was a bit more more complicated, as they have a near duopoly of card processing methods. I have no problem for example with BOA, or Amazon etc. as there are plenty of alternatives but from my bank I can get either a Mastercard or a Visa card and that is about it.

Also you do not have an absolute right to turn down service. In a lot of countries I would suggest if you put up a "No Blacks" etc. sign outside your shop etc then you would quickly get in legal trouble. Discrimination on grounds of skin colour, sexual orientation etc is in most places illigal, and rightly so. I would suggest that discrimination on the grounds that the government does not like you is something much worse.

The biggest problem I have is that it does look (to me at least) like government pressure was behind the decision, and that makes it very different to then deciding for themselves that they don't want to deal with wikileaks. Well that and the "we need these draconian rules to deal wiht terrorists" being subverted and the powers that be trying to use them on everyone (i.e. the attempt to put wikileaks on the list of terror orginisations.)

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (0)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630210)

I like your tone and thought-provoking reply. Unlike the other peoples comments it is not driving me mad but rather to think. You forgot probably that discover and AE is available as well, but that's beside the point. Anyways, VISA and MC is a current economic reality and our economy is based on it. When I read the story that small business owners who depend on the online transactions during the Christmas season could not get through because bunch of hackers decided upon themselves to conduct a "punishment session" for the credit card companies -- I realized that they are engaging in economic terrorism. They are not hurting MC or Visa because these companies are in business of lending money and collecting fees on micro-transactions. My personal problem is not necessarily with WikiLeaks but specifically with the "public avengers", i.e. misguided mob. This action in itself is the most undemocratic and barbaric thing that came out of that story, creating by far more harm to the economies of many countries at this time.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631012)

I thought the most barbaric thing to come out of this story is that a US corp pimped children out to afghan warlords to secure a contract and the US government is covering it up and not holding anyone responsible?

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

EyeSavant (725627) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631246)

Slightly pedantic point. I said "from my bank I can get either a Mastercard or a Visa card and that is about it", Discover is not very big outside the US, American express issue only the cards themsleves as I understand it, and not accepted everywhere but anyway.

Please though can we get away from the missuse of the the word terrorism. Terrorism involves killing people and threatening to kill people to get what you want. This is civil disobeidence. The best analogy is a something like a picket. It is annoying, it gets in everyones way and costs money. It has nothing to do with terrorism, and trying to connect them in any way cheapens the whole thing.

The whole "we need these draconian rules to deal wiht terrorists" to using those rules in situations that have nothing to do with terrorism is dangerous. The next time you try to change the rules to "deal with terrorists" you will get a fight.

I do wonder though what you think a reasonable response would be to MC and Visa? Democracy requires the right to protest, so what do you think would be ok? An actual picket of the MC and Visa head offices? Honestly I think the economic damage you quote is overstated, but that is getting very offtopic.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

penix1 (722987) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631778)

Then you didn't read / hear what was said. Either that or your were on a source that withheld the fact that NONE of the payment systems were affected by the DDoS. It was solely their website / some web services, which has nothing to do with payments.

MasterCard Statement on Service Interruption to its Corporate Website

Purchase, NY, December 08, 2010 - MasterCard has made significant progress in restoring full-service to its corporate website. Our core processing capabilities have not been compromised and cardholder account data has not been placed at risk. While we have seen limited interruption in some web-based services, cardholders can continue to use their cards for secure transactions globally.

http://www.mastercard.com/us/company/en/newsroom/pr_service_interruption.html [mastercard.com]

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630628)

In terms of Mastercard and Visa, I would say it was a bit more more complicated, as they have a near duopoly of card processing methods

It's called an oligopoly [wikipedia.org] , and that's certainly true. Particularly if you're interested in your card actually being accepted anywhere (there are still the Amexs and Discovers of the world, but they're not nearly as ubiquitous as Visa and Mastercard).

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629792)

The problem is that Visa and MasterCard together have pretty much a monopoly on international online payments. They own our payment infrastructure, and therefore they can decide what we can do with our money. That's just not an acceptable situation. Our payment infrastructure needs to be neutral, and not corporate owned.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629986)

OK you want a neutral non-corporate owned payment structure? Then create your "Peoples Credit Card" monopoly and see how far will you go without corporation... If it is government owned -- then it would be be a defeat in purpose. So technically your argument and preposition is either done in sarcastic humorous tone or completely stupid.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631166)

Have you considered that banks can do international payments too? Using IBAN numbers, etc, you can make payments to any bank account on the planet. Only it's expensive and cumbersome, and not integrated with an easy payment system. But I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to do just that.

Re:Time to close Flattr account... (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630448)

In this case, that's called "voluntary censorship". So yeah, that's what freedom of speech is kind of at ends with in any modern society.

donate to what exactly? (1)

snookerhog (1835110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629402)

funds to keep the servers up and running

OR

Assange's legal fund?

Re:donate to what exactly? (-1, Troll)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629416)

Sounds more like the Assange's legal fund. And personal profit fund.

Re:donate to what exactly? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629462)

Since we're bandying unfounded speculative rumour about - I heard you were a paedophile ... uh ... and a terrorist. And you hate puppies.

Re:donate to what exactly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629546)

Mod parent up!

Re:donate to what exactly? (-1, Troll)

sageres (561626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629570)

No, I am neither a pedophile nor a terrorist. But it is true, I do hate puppies. Who told you that secret? Joking aside, it has been reported by the ex-employees and associates of Wikileaks that Assange intended to make millions of dollars per year based upon the blackmailing the organizations on whom he has "secrets" for the rights not to publish them. Seriously, in the past he said that he has secret Kremlin documents. Now that Putin has come out so harsh in his defence, wanna bet that we will never see them in the light of day?

Re:donate to what exactly? (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629740)

Yeah, I'm going to need a citation on that.

Re:donate to what exactly? (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629750)

[citation needed]

Re:donate to what exactly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34632272)

Would these be the people who whinged in the media that Assange was a media whore?

Or the people who are trying to set up a competitor service to WIkiLeaks and have a vested interest in Assange's downfall?

obl: link. (5, Informative)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629440)

As opposed to posting a link to another board that has am IMAGE of the url; (madness!!)

here ya go:

https://flattr.com/profile/wikileaks [flattr.com]

Really editors, was that so hard? My new-years resolution? Find a site that is as good as Slashdot used to be.

Re:obl: link. (2)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629540)

I heard Fark was pretty good, and the community is awesome.

Re:obl: link. (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629772)

https://flattr.com/profile/wikileaks [flattr.com]

Really editors, was that so hard?

Holy Crap, how did you do that?

I imagine you probably had to open the page, take a screenshot of it, paste it in a word document, attach it to an email and send it to some link extraction service!

That's a lot of work just to post the link man, you expect editors to just find this kind of time?

Through the roof (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34630004)

How about this [google.com] link? Whats up with Mozambique, Kenya and Ethiopia?

Re:obl: link. (1)

samael (12612) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629990)

Hacker News is my current favourite alternative.

http://news.ycombinator.com/ [ycombinator.com]

I hear ya (1, Offtopic)

mutube (981006) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631286)

My new-years resolution? Find a site that is as good as Slashdot used to be.

This looks pretty good? [archive.org]

But Of Course (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629480)

It's amusing that some people believe they can get at an organisation like WikiLeaks by going after one man and putting pressure on every company imaginable not to do business with them. WikiLeaks will get donations regardless and if it's not WikiLeaks it will be something else. It's like no one has learned anything from the past ten or fifteen years.

Re:But Of Course (2, Insightful)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629614)

That's what I'm leaning from this. The whole US government classified bullshit is interesting and controversial; moreso, however, is the idea that businesses can basically kill off anyone they don't like by shutting their doors to them. Paypal goes down, BAC goes down, Visa/Mastercard goes down, and your business dies. Wal-Mart has threatened to stop selling CDs and DVDs because, frankly, they make 2% of their money from the merchandise and could use the space for something more profitable; while the labels make a vast portion of their CD sales from Wal-Mart, something like a third.

Re:But Of Course (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629782)

I was under the impression that classified was the lowest level, and everything starts at that level until it has been cleared as unclassified.

Re:But Of Course (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629828)

They say that it is classified, but nevertheless, it is read by around three million people in diplomatic circles. Unfortunately they still don't seem to understand that they can't label anything they choose as 'secret' and try ane enforce it after the fact.

Re:But Of Course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34630394)

You really don't understand how classifications work nor how the Government works with classified material. That's OK. Neither do a lot of our politicians it seems.

Re:But Of Course (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630106)

I was under the impression that classified was the lowest level

I was under the impression that "classified" meant that someone had bothered to review it or just classify it as to security status. Thus any restricted/sensitive document is classified which covers a lot of ground. No?

Re:But Of Course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34631402)

No. Every program has a classification guide that spells out what types of information are considered classified and at which level, as well what information is for official use only and what FOIA exemption it it is covered by. In generally, you are expected mark all draft documents with the correct classification, and process them on systems that are approved for that level of classification, erring on the side of caution. Draft documents are reviewed by someone else familiar with the classification guide to verify that they are correctly labeled before becoming official. Sometimes it is convenient to generate documents on a system of higher classification than is needed. In this case the document is treated as if it were classified at the same level as the system (regardless of markings) until it is reviewed and properly transferred to a unclassified (or differently classified) media.

Re:But Of Course (3, Informative)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632548)

Nope, a document is either Classified or it is not.

There are different levels inside Classified, such as 2, 3, NATO, ATOMAL, etc, but that's not terribly important. The vast, vast, vast majority of documents are Unclassified. That's because it is a FUCKING PAIN IN THE ASS to get your hands on anything Classified. You can't copy it, you can't email it, you have to use secure networks, work in pairs, etc. You'd be surprised at how much stuff is Unclassified. For example, the layouts of warships are Unclassified so the contractors can work on them. Only the tiny little bits that are really important (like the [REDACTED] or the [REDACTED]) are Classified. You can go about your day, working on military equipment, without ever having to use your security clearance. That's a good thing because you also have to go through a lengthy debriefing once you've worked on the drawings. Careless talk like "Oh yeah, I had to order part XYZ a year ago. A good vendor is ABC." Who-oops! Part XYZ, being of dimensions X, Y, and Z, now gives out a starting point for some first principles work, and then presto, the same info that's in a Classified spec.

You have to have three things to read a Classified document:
1. The appropriate clearance level. That's where the levels above come into play.
2. The need-to-know. If you have a clearance it doesn't mean you can just look up any document you feel like. You have to have a reason.
3. The appropriate environment. Computers and networks are assumed to be non-secure and you can't make copies.

So the interesting thing about this is the guy who leaked the documents isn't entirely responsible for what happened. Where was his supervisor? How did he breach security? I can't just walk into a secure room and download [REDACTED] on a thumb drive.

If you mark something as Classified when it's not supposed to be then it's a violation of those same Acts. There's a completely separate classification system for things that are personally embarrassing and can cause damage to a person. Classified is only for things that are damaging to the country. Damaging, NOT EMBARRASSING!

Re:But Of Course (1)

jank1887 (815982) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632684)

your impression is wrong. classified is not a de

Re:But Of Course (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629616)

That is something I am thinking about. I mean let's face it. The people who want to take wikileaks down are by no means idiots. Even if every once and a while they resorted to something that looks idiotic. So this raise the question, why the hell he is being targeted like that ? He can just be replaced in a heart beat if he is gone!

Re:But Of Course (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629892)

"So this raise the question, why the hell he is being targeted like that "

Surely you can't be so naive? He's being made an example of. Sure , someone else could stick their head above the parapet but if they know they'll get theirs blown off too they might not be so keen to do it.

Re:But Of Course (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629960)

There is a lot of people blind with ideals. Trash tactics like this won't work with people like that. Hence the point.

Oh they've learned something alright ... (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629654)

... which is why a lot of even supposedly liberal governments are making noises on clamping down on certain parts of the internet. And yes , there are always ways around, but unless you're technical you won't find them or be able to use them so that rules them out for 99% of the population.

So way to go all you wikileaks people, nice own goal with the freedom thing there.

Oh , and ssshhh! We won't mention Assanges mind bogglingly hypocritical whinge about his case details being leaked...

Re:Oh they've learned something alright ... (5, Insightful)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630150)

Oh , and ssshhh! We won't mention Assanges mind bogglingly hypocritical whinge about his case details being leaked...

Oh look, another idiot that can't understand the difference between a government's inherent right to privacy & an individual's inherent right to privacy.

Re:Oh they've learned something alright ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34631514)

Oh , and ssshhh! We won't mention Assanges mind bogglingly hypocritical whinge about his case details being leaked...

Oh look, another idiot that can't understand the difference between a government's inherent right to privacy & an individual's inherent right to privacy.

I think you are the one who doesn't understand. Of course the right to privacy is different for government and individuals, but Wikileaks previously published material that could be seen as violating individuals right to privacy.
Examples are the 9/11 pager massages, the BNP member list, the Wikileaks donor list and Palin's e-mails among others. In all of these cases the information is from or about individuals that are affiliated to political parties, other organisations or happened to be part of an event that is of public interest.

The same applies to the police file. It's a government document, Assange is the well known head of an important organisation and there is a large public interest. Furthermore there have been allegations that the investigation is politically motivated, that the accusers were simply out for revenge or even part of a plot to discredit Assange and indirectly Wikileaks and there was a lot of confusion about what the allegations actually are.

With these documents out in the open people can form a more informed opinion on the whole situation.

Re:Oh they've learned something alright ... (2)

NoSig (1919688) | more than 3 years ago | (#34632070)

No one likes being leaked about. I'm sure Assange believes that it was unprofessional for the US military to be unable to prevent leaks. Same goes for the police. Are you seriously thinking that Wikileaks, a press organization, should have the same approach to information that the police should? If not, then there is nothing hypocritical about Assange disliking when the the police is being run in the same way as a press organization, especially when that is damaging to him. Even when he is himself running a press organization. In the same way I can believe that violence can be necessary in some circumstances, yet dislike being subjected to violence myself. There is nothing hypocritical about that. The police is not Wikileaks and shouldn't act in the same ways - Assange is complaining that they are. In the same way the police can complain if I run around giving out traffic tickets even though they do the same thing themselves - that's because the police should do different things than I should do.

Wikileaks did not leak it's own donor list in the same way that they don't leak anything. Someone got access to that information through a mistake at Wikileaks, and that person then submitted the information to Wikileaks. Wikileaks recognized that the information they had received was the sort of information that they deal in, so to remain credible and to not be hypocrites, they published it even though they didn't like that information to be available. Because they are Wikileaks and so should act in different ways than e.g. the police.

Re:Oh they've learned something alright ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34632000)

When anyone appoints themselves as the watchdog over something as public as a government, then the public gains a legitimate interest in that person. Granted, if a person sets up an organization to do so, that is another matter, but Assange seems, from everything I have read, to be treating Wikileaks as a tool in a personal quest.

Re:But Of Course (1)

MichaelKristopeit300 (1962648) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629656)

it's amusing that some people believe "they" are only going after one man.

Re:But Of Course (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629904)

I didn't say they were, but 'they' obviously see some benefit in trying to go after one organisation and then one man as they are doing. Either they are trying to get the whole thing to go away or they're trying to use it as a deterrent, or both, but the history of such things concerning the internet tells us it won't be successful.

Re:But Of Course (0)

MichaelKristopeit307 (1962662) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630124)

or perhaps "they" just want you to believe "they" are only going after an organization or a single man... perhaps you believe such things because you only receive such information from "them".

open your eyes.

you're an idiot.

How is it funding itself? (3, Funny)

eepok (545733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629488)

How is it funding itself? Do they have $20 and continually re-donate it to their organization?

Wikileaks is innocent I say (4, Insightful)

troll -1 (956834) | more than 3 years ago | (#34629774)

Understand that Wikileaks hasn't leaked anything. They just published what was already leaked and which is what the New York Times and others have published in part so I wonder why MasterCard et al aren't doing the same thing to all the other media outlets that publish leaked info.

Maybe they all got a call from Lieberman's office or something.

Bullies is why (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34629976)

I wonder why MasterCard et al aren't doing the same thing to all the other media outlets that publish leaked info. by troll -1 (956834)
on Tuesday December 21, @11:52AM (#34629774)

Because they're big enough and well-financed enough to beat the hell out of them is why. Bullies don't hassle entities that can punch their lights out. Hence, why wikileaks is being targetted - not big/powerful enough to fight back.

Re:Wikileaks is innocent I say (0)

scotty.m (1881826) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630180)

You make a good point here troll... I wonder if this argument will come up when the US begin extraditing Julian. If they find him guilty they'll need follow through and shutdown every newspaper, tv channel and radio station both domestic and international?

Pul-lease!

Still Uses PayPal (or Moneybookers) (1)

iateyourcookies (1522473) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630090)

It's worth noting though that to top-up your Flattr account you need to use PayPal or Moneybookers (a UK similar service which also bowed to government pressure). So while this does make it possible, the sad fact is that your donation will not go as far. Flattr takes ~10% and I imagine PayPal or Moneybookers do similarly.

If you were hoping to take your custom away from these services and give others your money, this isn't the way to do it :(

Direct bank transfer (5, Informative)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630242)

Based on http://wikileaks.nl/support.html [wikileaks.nl] it is still possible to transfer money directly to two bank accounts (to fund Wikileaks itself, there is also information there if you want to fund Assange's defense):

Bank Transfer - Option 1: via Sunshine Press Productions ehf:

Skulagötu 19, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland
Landsbanki Islands Account number 0111-26-611010
BANK/SWIFT:NBIIISRE
ACCOUNT/IBAN:IS97 0111 2661 1010 6110 1002 80

Bank Transfer - Option 2: via the not-for-profit Wau Holland Stiftung Foundation:

This support is tax deductible in Germany
Bank Account: 2772812-04
IBAN: DE46 5204 0021 0277 2812 04
BIC Code: COBADEFF520
Bank: Commerzbank Kassel
German BLZ: 52040021
Subject: WIKILEAKS / WHS Projekt 04

The page also states that some European banks can transfer directly to Datacell, the collection agent for Wikileaks:

Using:

  • DirectEBanking : For online Donations from selected banks in Germany, Belguim, Austra, Switzerland and UK
  • iDEAL : For online Donations from the Netherlands

See URLs http://www.datacell.com/news.php [datacell.com] and https://payments.datacell.com/ [datacell.com] for more info about that last option

This site links to wikileaks.info (1)

hat_eater (1376623) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630350)

Wikileaks user profile [flattr.com] contains news tidbits that link to wikileaks.org and are redirected to wikileaks.info, a site Spamhaus recently wrote about [spamhaus.org] . I'll wait and see until I have some evidence that the money sent throught this account does really reach Wikileaks and not some clever Russian.

Yawn (0)

Blue6 (975702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630444)

This whole Wikileaks thing is a non-story. Really, can any one tell me something new or shocking learned form the leaks? Maybe it was the startling fact that Putin sees himself as a throw back to Russia's Cold War strong man, or the fact that Iran's neighbors are afraid they are being left out of the arms race. No none of those, maybe it was China hacking Google or the fact that civilians dies in a war. Nope it can't be those seeing how we already knew China hacked Google and oh yeah this country drop two atomic bombs on Japan and helped fire bomb a German city about sixty odd years ago. You go out of your way to try and embarrass The Man you have to be ready to face the consequences.

Re:Yawn (1)

hat_eater (1376623) | more than 3 years ago | (#34630714)

Oh [wordpress.com] really? [salon.com] tl;dr: What we learned from Wikileaks, besides the extent to which the US military is ready to sacrifice civilian population to hit probable targets, is the total darkness in which the US administration helds its constituents and the bipartisan support this mode of operation enjoys. It's one thing to suspect something, another to have the evidence written black on white.

Re:Yawn (2)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34631176)

You forgot a US corp pimping children to afghan warlords to win a contract and related coverup.

How does one give money to/through Flattr w/o visa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34630600)

How does one give money to/through Flattr without Visa, Paypal, Moneybookers or the other evul companies?

Bitcoin is the answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34631348)

Flattr can be shut down...Bitcoin is the answer, Wikileaks should set that up ASAP.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?