Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

Post by type0 » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 9:59 AM UTC

a3_nm wrote: post #30

Markoff wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i read they have 300 employees who create zero content on Wikipedia which is created by volunteers for free

Speaking as a Wikipedia "volunteer" (or rather "editor"), I think it is in fact a very good idea that the Foundation takes no editorial responsibilities (except reacting to legal challenges via so-called "office actions"). It means that editors don't have to worry about legal, sysadmin, PR, etc.; and conversely WMF is not directly responsible for Wikipedia content. Believe me, it would be silly for WMF to be involved…

Post by aluhut » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 10:32 AM UTC

KGIII wrote: post #16

Markoff wrote: post #3

what is there to surveil about wikimedia? aren't all articles public and even IP of non registered users? this seem like something to justify showing those donation requests in your face, despite Wikipedia drowning in money https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

As a regular donor, I'd like to address your concerns. I gave them the donations. They are gifts. They can spend them on hookers and blow, I don't care. I donate because I appreciate their service. I appreciate it enough to where I'd kinda like them to be making mad loot. I will continue to donate. I don't give gifts with strings. Gifts with strings are payments. My donation was a gift. Hell, I don't even write it of…

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 10:56 AM UTC

dom0 wrote: post #27

zzo38computer wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but only the addressing as far as I know.

The Stasi was able to read all mail of targets (and they had many) fifty years ago. Practically all mail crossing the border was read, which again was a lot. I'd assume addresses are scraped anyway, since they are digitized for routing already, and targeted mail being opened without leaving marks (an art existing for hundreds of years).

Post by walshemj » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 11:19 AM UTC

freeflight wrote: post #40

asher wrote: post #11

Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points: * All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restricti…

This isn't meant as an attack on the OP, but I have a hard time taking anybody seriously who's using the word "cyber" in such an inflated way. Always reminds me of this: https://twitter.com/sehnaoui/status/643972826802688000 I also think it's quite troublesome how this very real issue, IT security, is being misused to stage yet another "War on something" even if there isn't anything concrete to wage a war on. If ther…

Post by mtgx » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 12:05 PM UTC

asher wrote: post #11

Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points: * All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restricti…