Donations

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
78 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Brett Lymn-4
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 12:24:49PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> Imagine I turned it around: Randal L. Schwartz, I believe you are
> involved in illegal activity.
>

Too late - that has already been done to him in the past...

--
Brett Lymn
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited.  If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility.  It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
> > >>>>> "Theo" == Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]> writes:
> >
> > Theo> If you don't know why I am sending this mail.. you are reading US
> > Theo> managed news, and need to much much more informed....
> >
> Assuming you're talking about PayPal freezing the WikeLeaks account,
> Assange could only have been looking for publicity, as nobody but a total
> idiot would use PayPal for such a political hot potato!

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/03/wikileaks_on_amazon_ousting/page2.html

    "Since 2007 we have been deliberately placing some of our servers in
    jurisdictions that we suspected suffered a free speech deficit in
    order to separate rhetoric from reality," Assange said on Friday
    during a live chat on The Guardian's website. "Amazon was one of these
    cases."

The paypal situation is likely similar.  I bet that account which was
seized -- WITHOUT DUE PROCESS -- probably being continually simphoned
empty by wikileaks, therefore it can also demonstrate a 'due process
deficit'.

I'm sorry, but is my bet that a failure of due process which affects
you much more personally will eventually happen since you live there.
I am not attacking you in any way.  But it is poor style to mock those
who, simply as a side effect, manage to demonstrate that the right of
law is not being followed.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
> Ever head of Don Quixote? THe moral of the storey - pick the battles you
> have a chance of winning and avoid the rest.

Such an American viewpoint.

It didn't work out for Don Quixote either.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Jamie Paul Griffin-4
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 04:38:09PM -0600, L. V. Lammert wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Dec 2010, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 5 Dec 2010, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > > I agree totally that there are a lot of idiots running parts of the US
> > > system, but at least they ARE predictable.
> >
> > Being predictable is just not enough. Hardly You would enjoy predictability of
> > You being put to prison on suspection of possibility of You committing some
> > crime.
> >
> Actually, being predictable ALLOWS planning to avoid such problems!
>
> Ever head of Don Quixote? The moral of the storey - pick the battles you
> have a chance of winning and avoid the rest.
>
> Lee
>

if nothing else think about the charges they put on every transaction: you sell something on ebay, they charge you; you process their payment through paypal (ebay) they charge you again. they're clearly ripping us all us all off - fact! and to top it all of the charges have become extortionate.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Fred Elwood
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
PayPal's terms of use do not permit soliciting crime.  Wikileaks
solicits the
holders of US security clearances to violate their
non-disclosure agreements.
That is a crime.

Some people think it should not be a crime. But it is.  Some
people
think that it matters that WIkileaks says that they do not ask for
submissions.  That matters about as much as a mob boss saying that he
didn't
ask anyone to shoot so-and-so, just that wouldn't it be
fortunate if someone
did?  Wikileaks model is predicated on breaking
NDAs, and based on what their
cite on their front pages, breaking NDAs
on US classified information is their
biggest product center.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Bulk] Re: Donations

Kevin Chadwick-2
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
On Sun, 5 Dec 2010 16:38:09 -0600 (CST)
"L. V. Lammert" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ever head of Don Quixote? THe moral of the storey - pick the battles you
> have a chance of winning and avoid the rest.

Operation Chariot - Where british commandos accomplished an impossible
mission, with the help of code breakers, contributing to wwIIs greatest
battleship being nullified and without it sinking a single ship.

I'd say, forget chance, just make good choices of what and when.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

L. V. Lammert
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On Sun, 5 Dec 2010, Theo de Raadt wrote:

> > Ever head of Don Quixote? THe moral of the storey - pick the battles you
> > have a chance of winning and avoid the rest.
>
> Such an American viewpoint.
>
It was intended to be common sense. I'll be the first to agree that some
of the companies here in the US don't operate honorably, but, then you
should know that in the first place and not complain so loudely when
something does happen to prove it.

> It didn't work out for Don Quixote either.
>
It does make a nice play, however.

        Lee

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda-2
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:38 PM, L. V. Lammert <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2010, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
>
>> > On Sun, 5 Dec 2010, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> > I agree totally that there are a lot of idiots running parts of the US
>> > system, but at least they ARE predictable.
>>
>> Being predictable is just not enough. Hardly You would enjoy predictibility
of

>> You being put to prison on suspection of possibility of You commiting some
>> crime.
>>
> Actually, being predictable ALLOWS planning to avoid such problems!
>
> Ever head of Don Quixote? THe moral of the storey - pick the battles you
> have a chance of winning and avoid the rest.
>
> B  B  B  B Lee
>
>

The moral of the story was that when you are left of all your objectives and
believings you suddenly die of sad and oldness. :P

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by Fred Elwood
> PayPal's terms of use do not permit soliciting crime.

Paypal's terms of use are just that; terms of use.  The account was
being run by the German charity WHS.

Noone has said that wikileaks has commited a crime.  What statute
are you talking about?

> Wikileaks
> solicits the
> holders of US security clearances to violate their
> non-disclosure agreements.
> That is a crime.

I hereby ask anyone who holds secrets that the world should know
of, which may contain indications of real crimes having been commited
should send them to wikileaks.

Did I just commit a crime?  Oh, remember I do not live in the US.

> Some people think it should not be a crime. But it is.  Some people
> think that it matters that WIkileaks says that they do not ask for
> submissions.  That matters about as much as a mob boss saying that he
> didn't ask anyone to shoot so-and-so, just that wouldn't it be
> fortunate if someone
> did?  Wikileaks model is predicated on breaking
> NDAs, and based on what their
> cite on their front pages, breaking NDAs
> on US classified information is their
> biggest product center.

You think it should be a crime.  You just justified skipping due process.

I hope that one day due process is denied you.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Adam M. Dutko
> I hope that one day due process is denied you.
>

I am wondering what type of due process should be granted to these
individuals.  What basis/jurisdiction of law are we talking about?  Natural
human rights? US law? International Law?  I'm just wondering because I think
it's critical to the whole discussion.  Julian Assange isn't a US citizen so
the US Government probably feels justified doing whatever they want even if
it is "unethical", yet many think he should be protected by some of the US
justice code/process.  Is due process universal?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Fred Elwood
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
--- On Mon, 12/6/10, Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From:
Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Donations
> To: "Fred
Elwood" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Monday,
December 6, 2010, 1:42 AM
> > PayPal's terms of use do not
> permit soliciting
crime.
>
> Paypal's terms of use are just that; terms of use.
> The account
was
> being run by the German charity WHS.
>
> Noone has said that wikileaks
has commited a crime.
> What statute
> are you talking about?
>
> >
Wikileaks
> > solicits the
> > holders of US security clearances to violate
their
> > non-disclosure agreements.
> > That is a crime.
>
> I hereby ask
anyone who holds secrets that the world should
> know
> of, which may contain
indications of real crimes having
> been commited
> should send them to
wikileaks.
>
> Did I just commit a crime?  

No.

> Oh, remember I do not
live
> in the US.

Hypothetical cleared US personnel who took you up on this
request WOULD be committing a crime.

>
> > Some people think it should not
be a crime. But it
> is.  Some people
> > think that it matters that WIkileaks
says that they do
> not ask for
> > submissions.  That matters about as much
as a mob
> boss saying that he
> > didn't ask anyone to shoot so-and-so, just
that
> wouldn't it be
> > fortunate if someone
> > did?  Wikileaks model is
predicated on breaking
> > NDAs, and based on what their
> > cite on their
front pages, breaking NDAs
> > on US classified information is their
> >
biggest product center.
>
> You think it should be a crime.  You just
justified
> skipping due process.
>

Against whom?  Due process rights exist
in criminal and civil proceedings, not in business arrangements.  Wikileaks
has no more due process rights against PayPal than Wim has against you; they
might be able to sue for breach of contract, but that's it.  "Due process" has
nothing to do with this case.  The nickel summary is that "due process" is not
in play if the cops are not directly involved.

The crime I am talking about
is the crime of the cleared individuals disclosing the classified information.
PayPal did not terminate Wikileaks for committing a crime, but for using
PayPal in support of their soliciting crimes (unlawful disclosure/conveyance
of classified information), which is against their terms of service.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Aradian
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On 12/4/10 9:25 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:

> In the future, if people can show preference for the non-Paypal
> transaction methods when they donate, we would appreciate that over
> Paypal.
>
> Since the projects hackathons (and many other things) are very much
> funded by donations, it is hard for us to fully dissasociate
> completely from Paypal.  However we can ask and recommend that people
> pass less money through them.
>
> If you don't know why I am sending this mail.. you are reading US
> managed news, and need to much much more informed....
>
> Thanks.
>
>

I'm very glad to see the OpenBSD project take this position. In fact, I
think I'll have to make a donation just because of this.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Martin Schröder
In reply to this post by Fred Elwood
2010/12/6 Fred Elwood <[hidden email]>:
> PayPal did not terminate Wikileaks for committing a crime, but for using
> PayPal in support of their soliciting crimes (unlawful disclosure/conveyance

Where's the court sentence deciding that Wikileaks is soliciting crimes?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

ropers
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On 6 December 2010 02:42, Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The account was being run by the German charity WHS.

Since it took me a while to find out who they are -- maybe others will
appreciate the pointer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wau_Holland_Foundation

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Sean Kamath
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On Dec 4, 2010, at 10:05 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:

>> On Dec 4, 2010, at 7:25 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>>> If you don't know why I am sending this mail.. you are reading US
>>> managed news, and need to much much more informed....
>>
>> It's in the US news.  Even the mainstream news on TV.  At least in Silicon
>> Valley. ;-)
>
> No, it isn't in the US news.

Didn't realize you kept such a close eye on the US news.

> The US news is all about the messenger, to distract you from reading
> the message.

No, not really.  The left and right coast is usually a little better about
covering news.  And when a high-tech company is involved, the US news in a
very heavy high-tech area will, and does, cover it.  More than just the
typical pablum on national TV.

> If you think it is in the US news, you have a long way to go.
>
> guardian.co.uk/world is the best place to read the *message*.

I didn't see anything on the guardian, or the BBC, that was new to me.
Granted, I also read /. and digg and others and they have a lot of pointers to
the Register, Guardian, etc., so maybe I read it there.  But I also read the
local newspapers, and they cover the local stuff pretty thoroughly.

But don't assume that because I live in the US, with it's godforsaken pile of
Jesusland citizens and Banking-industry controlled politicians, that I'm not
"informed".

Sean

PS. Banking rules my ass.  Bankers do whatever the hell they want, anywhere in
the world.  Look at Iceland.  Paypal is evil.  Bankers are the devil
incarnate.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Joakim Aronius
In reply to this post by L. V. Lammert
* L. V. Lammert ([hidden email]) wrote:
> Have you ever tried to read the TOS? Any such organization with unlimited
> legal resources can do whatever the wish - as long as it's not contrary to
> the current legal winds, they will get away with it.

In a legal sense yes. In a business sense, hopefully not, if enough people take their money elsewhere. I terminated my PP account yesterday.

/Joakim

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Joachim Schipper-2
In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 11:10:06AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]> writes:
>> If you don't know why I am sending this mail.. you are reading US
>> managed news, and need to much much more informed....
>
> If this is in reference to Wikileaks, it's because Paypal believes that
> Wikileaks is involved in illegal activity, and to some degree, I agree
> with them.  (I believe a lot of the "diplomatic actions" we do in the US
> are wrong, but two wrongs don't make a right.)

I find it interesting that many people apparently consider WikiLeaks to
have no legitimacy at all. Newspapers publish leaked documents all the
time (although usually not this many); in fact, a couple of newspapers
*did* publish stuff based on cables received prior to publication at
wikileaks.org.

I understand that self-censorship is common in the US at this point, but
it's rather strange that this is suddenly all about WikiLeaks -
traditionally, the employee leaking the documents would be in hot water,
if found, and the newspaper would be left alone. (Which is not entirely
unreasonable - the employee has a certain self-assumed duty to his/her
employer, which the newspaper doesn't share.)

I'm glad to see Theo standing up for his principles (again).

                Joachim

P.S. Despite the above support, I think some measure of secrecy and
power politics is probably, sadly, necessary for a better world -
"freedom is a well-armed sheep".

--
TFMotD: setpgid, setpgrp (2) - set process group
http://www.joachimschipper.nl/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Sevan / Venture37-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Eric Furman-3
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
This is Theo's list so he can say anything he likes,
but like any thread like this just stop feeding it.
This thread benefits no one. Not Theo. Not Wikileaks
Nobody.

On Sun, 05 Dec 2010 18:42 -0700, "Theo de Raadt"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> > PayPal's terms of use do not permit soliciting crime.
>
> Paypal's terms of use are just that; terms of use.  The account was
> being run by the German charity WHS.
>
> Noone has said that wikileaks has commited a crime.  What statute
> are you talking about?
>
> > Wikileaks
> > solicits the
> > holders of US security clearances to violate their
> > non-disclosure agreements.
> > That is a crime.
>
> I hereby ask anyone who holds secrets that the world should know
> of, which may contain indications of real crimes having been commited
> should send them to wikileaks.
>
> Did I just commit a crime?  Oh, remember I do not live in the US.
>
> > Some people think it should not be a crime. But it is.  Some people
> > think that it matters that WIkileaks says that they do not ask for
> > submissions.  That matters about as much as a mob boss saying that he
> > didn't ask anyone to shoot so-and-so, just that wouldn't it be
> > fortunate if someone
> > did?  Wikileaks model is predicated on breaking
> > NDAs, and based on what their
> > cite on their front pages, breaking NDAs
> > on US classified information is their
> > biggest product center.
>
> You think it should be a crime.  You just justified skipping due process.
>
> I hope that one day due process is denied you.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Donations

Joe Barnett-2
In reply to this post by Jamie Paul Griffin-4
On 12/5/10 5:11 PM, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
>
> if nothing else think about the charges they put on every transaction: you sell something on ebay, they charge you; you process their payment through paypal (ebay) they charge you again. they're clearly ripping us all us all off - fact! and to top it all of the charges have become extortionate.
>

Perhaps everything should just be (lowercase) free?  No charge ever
for anything.  Heck, if that is how it worked, then this entire
discussion would not be taking place as OpenBSD would not need funds
to continue its operations (and in that sense I would be greatly
relieved, since I would likely have to hear less about Theo's
selective outrage.  Speaking of that outrage, I think it would be
great if he put his money where his mouth is and not accept US
dollars in support of OpenBSD... but I am not holding my breath).

But things are not free.  It takes commerce to produce nearly every
material good, as distasteful as that might be to some people.  It
is called business.  No one is forcing anyone to use ebay or paypal.
 If anyone wants to play in their marketplace, however, they must
play by the established rules.

1234