Late; but better late than never.
They could have raised a lot more if they had started accepting it earlier.
Topic: Wikipedia Raises 237 BTC Through Donations In One Week - page 2. (Read 3516 times)
Last year, I had my wallet ready to donate, but nooo.... they wouldn't accept it.
This is truly amazing, I'm stunned at what all of us can do together. 
The WikkiLeaks founder had said in a news interview a few months ago that if it was not for their investment in BTC several years ago they would likely have not been able to survive. They had purchased several thousand BTC for pennies and sold it near it's highs. The moral of the story is that dollars are not the only thing that can support a foundation.
Small correction. Wikileaks didn't purchase the bitcoins. They published a donation address and the bitcoins were donated. I donated a bunch way back.
I'm not going to donate, but it's a good thing that they've started accepting them. I hope more charaties or projects like this get on board. It's free money at the end of the day.
And easy. Free and easy donation coming from a massive community with great potential to help any corporation
That is really great. Good adv for bitcoin. Hope to see such thing on other different resources
The WikkiLeaks founder had said in a news interview a few months ago that if it was not for their investment in BTC several years ago they would likely have not been able to survive. They had purchased several thousand BTC for pennies and sold it near it's highs. The moral of the story is that dollars are not the only thing that can support a foundation.
Small correction. Wikileaks didn't purchase the bitcoins. They published a donation address and the bitcoins were donated. I donated a bunch way back.
^ wikileaks went on to accept bitcoin.. and bitcoin is still obviously going strong. so i'd say that despite his genius, satoshi was wrong in this instance. i think he was right to disappear though.
But I thought they didn't accept bitcoin until way later?
wikileaks is not the same as wikimedia/wikipedia though. julian assange is associated with wikileaks. satoshi was against wikileaks accepting btc because it is an organization that functions to expose government secrecy.
maybe i could have done a better job explaining. wikileaks exposes government secrets, which is consider a danger to the state. associating bitcoin with them, as satoshi thought, was bad news.
Ok, Satoshi was the reason they were not contacted in early 2010 but why didn't they respond to the other attempts?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/matonis-article-wikipedia-hypocrisy-and-feedzebirds-campaign-90729
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/just-sent-this-message-to-wikipedia-54988
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-accepting-donations-32848
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedias-yearly-donation-campaign-time-to-accept-bitcoins-50158
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-1896
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/jimbo-wales-on-wikipedia-accepting-bitcoins-70105
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-51994
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-needs-help-perhaps-they-should-accept-donations-in-btc-52417
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/matonis-article-wikipedia-hypocrisy-and-feedzebirds-campaign-90729
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/just-sent-this-message-to-wikipedia-54988
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-accepting-donations-32848
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedias-yearly-donation-campaign-time-to-accept-bitcoins-50158
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-1896
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/jimbo-wales-on-wikipedia-accepting-bitcoins-70105
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-51994
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-needs-help-perhaps-they-should-accept-donations-in-btc-52417
i'm a little bit confused here.. wikimedia/wikipedia is not the same as wikileaks.
Ok, Satoshi was the reason they were not contacted in early 2010 but why didn't they respond to the other attempts?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/matonis-article-wikipedia-hypocrisy-and-feedzebirds-campaign-90729
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/just-sent-this-message-to-wikipedia-54988
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-accepting-donations-32848
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedias-yearly-donation-campaign-time-to-accept-bitcoins-50158
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-1896
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/jimbo-wales-on-wikipedia-accepting-bitcoins-70105
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-51994
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-needs-help-perhaps-they-should-accept-donations-in-btc-52417
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/matonis-article-wikipedia-hypocrisy-and-feedzebirds-campaign-90729
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/just-sent-this-message-to-wikipedia-54988
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-accepting-donations-32848
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedias-yearly-donation-campaign-time-to-accept-bitcoins-50158
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-1896
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/jimbo-wales-on-wikipedia-accepting-bitcoins-70105
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-read-a-personal-appeal-from-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-51994
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wikipedia-needs-help-perhaps-they-should-accept-donations-in-btc-52417
^ wikileaks went on to accept bitcoin.. and bitcoin is still obviously going strong. so i'd say that despite his genius, satoshi was wrong in this instance. i think he was right to disappear though.
But I thought they didn't accept bitcoin until way later?
wikileaks is not the same as wikimedia/wikipedia though. julian assange is associated with wikileaks. satoshi was against wikileaks accepting btc because it is an organization that functions to expose government secrecy.
^ wikileaks went on to accept bitcoin.. and bitcoin is still obviously going strong. so i'd say that despite his genius, satoshi was wrong in this instance. i think he was right to disappear though.
But I thought they didn't accept bitcoin until way later?
wikileaks is not the same as wikimedia/wikipedia though. julian assange is associated with wikileaks. satoshi was against wikileaks accepting btc because it is an organization that functions to expose government secrecy.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
And they still have the bitcoin donation option burried somewhere in their site...
That doesn't matter much. So are all the other "alternative" options.
How much money did wikipedia make last week? From all the other alternative methods together
140000*5/4 because the news sites reported about 18% of all donations were BTC in that week.
I meant methods besides paypal/credit card.
Oh, no clue. But I read somewhere a while back, that they only do about 5 million USD per year in stock donations, if its any help for you
And they still have the bitcoin donation option burried somewhere in their site...
That doesn't matter much. So are all the other "alternative" options.
How much money did wikipedia make last week? From all the other alternative methods together
140000*5/4 because the news sites reported about 18% of all donations were BTC in that week.
I meant methods besides paypal/credit card.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
^ wikileaks went on to accept bitcoin.. and bitcoin is still obviously going strong. so i'd say that despite his genius, satoshi was wrong in this instance. i think he was right to disappear though.
But I thought they didn't accept bitcoin until way later?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
And they still have the bitcoin donation option burried somewhere in their site...
That doesn't matter much. So are all the other "alternative" options.
How much money did wikipedia make last week? From all the other alternative methods together
140000*5/4 because the news sites reported about 18% of all donations were BTC in that week.
And they still have the bitcoin donation option burried somewhere in their site...
That doesn't matter much. So are all the other "alternative" options.
How much money did wikipedia make last week? From all the other alternative methods together
^ wikileaks went on to accept bitcoin.. and bitcoin is still obviously going strong. so i'd say that despite his genius, satoshi was wrong in this instance. i think he was right to disappear though.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
@question authority: Wikimedia needs to sell those coins. Like they need to sell stock donated to them. Even if they'd love to hold them, they can't because of the structure of their foundation. Read it up..
I don't believe for one second that they bought Bitcoin for pennies and sold it later for a huge profit. If that were true why not just start accepting Bitcoin donations several years ago when they were first approached? Also, where did they exchange them? Do they have an address that can be checked? That's total BS. They finally know an easy way to get cash for them so they accept them now.
They also tried to start accepting BTC donations in the early days of BTC, but satoshi asked they not accept BTC donations because it would attract too much attention to BTC when BTC was too young.
Source?
finally found it.. it was on page 3. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26999
Basically, bring it on. Let's encourage Wikileaks to use Bitcoins and I'm willing to face any risk or fallout from that act.
No, don't "bring it on".The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way.
I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.
Nice find. He was right after all
@question authority: Wikimedia needs to sell those coins. Like they need to sell stock donated to them. Even if they'd love to hold them, they can't because of the structure of their foundation. Read it up..
I don't believe for one second that they bought Bitcoin for pennies and sold it later for a huge profit. If that were true why not just start accepting Bitcoin donations several years ago when they were first approached? Also, where did they exchange them? Do they have an address that can be checked? That's total BS. They finally know an easy way to get cash for them so they accept them now.
They also tried to start accepting BTC donations in the early days of BTC, but satoshi asked they not accept BTC donations because it would attract too much attention to BTC when BTC was too young.
Source?
finally found it.. it was on page 3. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26999
Basically, bring it on. Let's encourage Wikileaks to use Bitcoins and I'm willing to face any risk or fallout from that act.
No, don't "bring it on".The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way.
I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.
here is also his 2nd to last post. i think the wikileaks issue was what sent him away. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.29280
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
And they still have the bitcoin donation option burried somewhere in their site...
That doesn't matter much. So are all the other "alternative" options.
Jump to: