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

[Explodicle]

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.

[1714021810]

1714021810

[1714021810]

1714021810

[1714021810]

1714021810

[sunnankar]

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.

[kiba]

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]

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

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

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

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...

[sunnankar]

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."

[grondilu]

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?

[rjk]

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?

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