21–30 of 31 posts
There have been some warnings that should WikiLeaks be sued in the US, all backers (PayPal trackable) could also be sued. It was proposed that WikiLeaks should provide an untraceable payment method.
[citation needed]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It apparently got unfrozen due to, ahem, popular request - http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8192453527 .
Hmm, that's utterly unprecedented. I wonder what Wikileaks has on PayPal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It apparently got unfrozen due to, ahem, popular request - http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8192453527 .
Hmm, that's utterly unprecedented. I wonder what Wikileaks has on PayPal.
The last internet archive snapshot was in April 30, 2008 but it gives a good feel for the kind of info that was there. http://web.archive.org/web/20080430123942/http://wikileaks.o... Some of their major scoops include: http://web.archive.org/web/20080207141628/wikileaks.org/wiki...
Perhaps. Remember, the IA embargoes their copies for 6-9 months as part of the arrangement with AltaVista.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm, that's utterly unprecedented. I wonder what Wikileaks has on PayPal.
It's not unprecedented at all. People know people. You just call up some mid-level or senior PayPal rep, if you know one - and I know plenty of people who do. If there's a media shitstorm brewing, PayPal will also be responsive - it's business 101. PayPal have no interest in blocking Wikileaks, they're just caught up in their own bureaucracy and fraud protection measures.
Given all the upvotes on this post, I'm guessing I'm in the minority. But, I'm not a fan of wikileaks' ethics. Whistler blowers are important, and I have a lot of respect for their bravery, but wikileaks feels like a metalayer on top of whistle blowing that feels slightly gamey and a little celebratory.
Whistle blowing is often a very grey business. My actions may be somewhat but obviously illegal, and the bag guys may not be very but not so obviously so. It can backfire.
This is why the meta-layer is important. I just send one email, and I'm pretty secure that my actions are confidential. Worst case scenario is they decide not to publish it, in which case i'm not really worse of. If I want, I can try again with a classic news outlet.
We should scrape this and provide archives in P2P so that the information isn't lost and hopefully they will do a similar spray of unreleased docs if they go down. I'll have a look for existing documents tomorrow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I posted their call for volunteers several weeks ago: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1023663 They never even replied to my email offering help, or to anyone else as far as I can tell. I'm still a supporter of their mission, but the organization seems pretty flakey.
I remember your post, and thought this might have been a dupe; however, it sounds the same, with the same lack of details. Did anyone receive responses to their offers of technical help?
Given all the upvotes on this post, I'm guessing I'm in the minority. But, I'm not a fan of wikileaks' ethics. Whistler blowers are important, and I have a lot of respect for their bravery, but wikileaks feels like a metalayer on top of whistle blowing that feels slightly gamey and a little celebratory.
Don't you think whistle blowing needs a meta-layer? Say I'm some guy in some room and on my desktop sits a very nasty excel about illegal or unethical party payments. What do I do? I can send them to a newspaper, which may not publish them (for a long list of reasons). I may send them to several newspapers, in which case there is a better chance that they will be published. But then I have a pretty big chance of bein…