2012-06-29 forbes.com - Wikipedia's lame excuse for not accepting BTC

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: grondilu on July 03, 2012, 08:36:54 AM

Quote from: sunnankar on July 03, 2012, 12:11:55 AM

From Mashable in 2010: "Google has opened up its charity wallet once again. This time, the search giant has donated $2,000,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that runs and maintains Wikipedia."

Honnestly that's quite a big sum of money. Do they really need that much to run webservers? Huh

Servers cost money, and so do the staff that run them. You can get copies of various financial reports here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Financial_reports and some more details here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Where_can_I_find_more_financial_information.3F

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Quote from: sunnankar on July 03, 2012, 12:11:55 AM

From Mashable in 2010: "Google has opened up its charity wallet once again. This time, the search giant has donated $2,000,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that runs and maintains Wikipedia."

Honnestly that's quite a big sum of money. Do they really need that much to run webservers? Huh

sunnankar

legendary

Activity: 1031

Merit: 1000

Quote from: kiba on June 30, 2012, 09:17:21 PM

Quote from: sunnankar on June 30, 2012, 09:14:58 PM

They are funded by Google, their largest donator, and it is a symbiotic relationship. Beggers can't be choosers. Always remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

[Citation needed]

From Mashable in 2010: "Google has opened up its charity wallet once again. This time, the search giant has donated $2,000,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that runs and maintains Wikipedia."

From Reuters in 2011: "But that may soon go away, thanks to Google co-founder Sergey Brin and his wife Anne Wojcicki.

The duo donated $500,000 to the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia and its sister sites, through their Brin Wojcicki Foundation."

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: Explodicle on June 30, 2012, 12:36:47 PM

Quote from: grondilu on June 30, 2012, 11:00:42 AM

Or we could also fuck the CC-BY-SA and make an illegal fork on Tor.

Because CC-BY-SA makes forking a real pain in the ass, and that is why there are so few forks of wikipedia.

But then the audience would be severely diminished. The Pirate Wikipedia would have to be a LOT more useful. Being able to include ANY copyrighted content would sure help, though.

Hum... Piratepedia... that's interesting... an automatic copy/merge from everything in wikipedia, plus copyrighted content...

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Nice article. Wikimedia is being really hypocritical. Won't get any of my money anymore, until they change this.

By the way, Matonis forgot to mention the euro as one of the "under surveillance" currencies. France is in the group: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship#.22Internet_enemies.22_and_countries_under_surveillance_lists

kiba

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1014

Quote from: sunnankar on June 30, 2012, 09:14:58 PM

Quote from: jwzguy on June 29, 2012, 04:17:31 PM

If they can be picky, I guess they don't need donations very badly. No problem.

They are funded by Google, their largest donator, and it is a symbiotic relationship. Beggers can't be choosers. Always remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

[Citation needed]

sunnankar

legendary

Activity: 1031

Merit: 1000

Quote from: jwzguy on June 29, 2012, 04:17:31 PM

If they can be picky, I guess they don't need donations very badly. No problem.

They are funded by Google, their largest donator, and it is a symbiotic relationship. Beggers can't be choosers. Always remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

Explodicle

hero member

Activity: 950

Merit: 1001

Quote from: grondilu on June 30, 2012, 11:00:42 AM

Quote from: teknomunk on June 30, 2012, 10:57:05 AM

Quote from: grondilu on June 30, 2012, 09:58:29 AM

Why hasn't any bitcoin fan forked wikipedia already ?

I was thinking the same thing. If you don't like how the Wikimedia Foundation operates, create your own. The CC-BY-SA the content of Wikipedia is licensed under allows this to be done.

Or we could also fuck the CC-BY-SA and make an illegal fork on Tor.

Because CC-BY-SA makes forking a real pain in the ass, and that is why there are so few forks of wikipedia.

But then the audience would be severely diminished. The Pirate Wikipedia would have to be a LOT more useful. Being able to include ANY copyrighted content would sure help, though.

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Quote from: teknomunk on June 30, 2012, 10:57:05 AM

Quote from: grondilu on June 30, 2012, 09:58:29 AM

Why hasn't any bitcoin fan forked wikipedia already ?

I was thinking the same thing. If you don't like how the Wikimedia Foundation operates, create your own. The CC-BY-SA the content of Wikipedia is licensed under allows this to be done.

Or we could also fuck the CC-BY-SA and make an illegal fork on Tor.

Because CC-BY-SA makes forking a real pain in the ass, and that is why there are so few forks of wikipedia.

teknomunk

member

Activity: 88

Merit: 10

Quote from: grondilu on June 30, 2012, 09:58:29 AM

Why hasn't any bitcoin fan forked wikipedia already ?

I was thinking the same thing. If you don't like how the Wikimedia Foundation operates, create your own. The CC-BY-SA the content of Wikipedia is licensed under allows this to be done.

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Why hasn't any bitcoin fan forked wikipedia already ?

Clipse

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 502

Quote from: jwzguy on June 29, 2012, 04:17:31 PM

If they can be picky, I guess they don't need donations very badly. No problem.

Made me wonder the same. To me it seems like they think its far too much effort to turn bitcoins into $$$ to spend in fiat form and any company asking for donations that relates to such a stance is clearly just taking someone for a ride.

Ive allready gotten sick and tired of their constant begging post/spreads and what not on wikipedia and the sad faces of how much they need my help.

Explodicle

hero member

Activity: 950

Merit: 1001

We should check if Conservapedia will accept bitcoin, that would attract some attention from Wikipedians. Cheesy

We could also use bounties to improve specific articles, offering "X BTC worth of USD" and convert it ourselves. That would be worth asking about on the bounty talk page, though. I think it's particularly easy to raise international software bounties with bitcoin.

jwzguy

hero member

Activity: 868

Merit: 1002

If they can be picky, I guess they don't need donations very badly. No problem.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

It has been interpreted to be responsible and prudent to hold bitcoins as long as possible.

Dusty

hero member

Activity: 731

Merit: 503

Libertas a calumnia

Quote from: hazek on June 29, 2012, 11:19:46 AM

Do you see people? Do you see how afraid people are to risk facing violence in pursuit of their freedom? How do people ever expect to be free with this kind of mindset is beyond me, they might as well just walk inside an actual cage and sign a voluntary slave contract.

This.

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on June 29, 2012, 02:29:42 PM

They are playing politics is all it is.

And probably this too.

wareen

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1001

Revolutionizing Brokerage of Personal Data

Quote from: justusranvier on June 29, 2012, 02:26:58 PM

Wikimedia Foundation does not need payment processing. What they need is donation processing, which is slightly different.

Using a single Bitcoin address might not be the best option from a privacy and accounting perspective and frankly I don't see the big advantage compared to the way bit-pay currently handles donation processing.
Anyway - that's a surely a minor detail not really relevant for Wikimedia's decision to refuse Bitcoin donations Sad

RodeoX

legendary

Activity: 3066

Merit: 1145

The revolution will be monetized!

Hunger changes everything. Wiki is hurting for cash, I will only donate in bitcoin. Time is not on their side.

Stephen Gornick

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 1010

Quote from: Piper67 on June 29, 2012, 12:48:07 PM

Nah-hah... screw that. Let them start accepting Bitcoin. All it takes is the slightest bit of spine. I for one would much rather donate my money to someone willing to accept BTC than to someone not willing.

Seriously, they aren't saying they don't know how, or that they don't see the return for the effort, or any other reason that might have a tinge of logic behind it, ... they are saying they don't want Bitcoin. [And, by saying that, they are saying they don't want to promote Bitcoin or the idea that Bitcoin works as a payment system for donations.]

They are playing politics is all it is.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1009

Quote from: wareen on June 29, 2012, 11:59:00 AM

bit-pay offers payment processing for 501(c)(3) organizations without charge and, as they claim, "ZERO Bitcoin Liability".
Maybe worth a shot for Tony to approach them directly suggesting and explaining this option.

We could also have a trusted member of the community collect donations for Wikimedia Foundation to be payed out as soon as they officially list Bitcoin as donation option. I don't think it would change anything though, because in the end they are probably just afraid to be associated with Bitcoin for whatever reason Sad

Wikimedia Foundation does not need payment processing. What they need is donation processing, which is slightly different.

They need to be able to set up an account and, instead of getting a shopping cart plugin, just have a bitcoin address for which all received funds (minus fees) will be autoconverted to USD and deposited for them. Then they have no more excuse for not accepting bitcoin donations.

Topic: 2012-06-29 forbes.com - Wikipedia's lame excuse for not accepting BTC (Read 3755 times)