Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Huge Interest Brings Wikileaks Offline

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the yet-drudge-still-stands dept.

DragonFire1024 writes "Wikinews.org — The Wikileaks website, which publishes sensitive and censored material submitted by anonymous contributors, has experienced unprecedented levels of Internet traffic today through public interest. This interest has caused the website's servers to be unable to meet the enormous demand of over 164 gigabytes of download traffic within twenty-four hours, leading the site to be temporarily inaccessible."

4 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not offline? by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 3, Insightful

    as a precautionary measure, i honestly think we *should take note whenever WL goes down.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  2. Re:Not offline? by LordKaT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look, I'm all for keeping an eye out on Wikileaks. I think it serves a very important purpose in a time when a lot of governments - and their people - feel that the withholding of information is a good idea.

    But Wikileaks simply succumbed to an overwhelming demand of visitors. This news story is like saying "Look! People are actually reading shit about the Tibetan protests rather than trying to find out who Paris Hilton's new best friend is going to be! Oh my god!"

  3. Not offtopic by Cheesey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is exactly why Wikileaks was offline. The whole story is about Fitna. Basically, the Wikileaks admins got death threats and had to take the video offline, replacing it with an apology about having to put staff safety before freedom of speech. Later, the site might have been taken down by the increased traffic, but by that time Fitna was already on Google Video and Youtube, so it was way too late to stop people seeing it.

    I think the Slashdot editors might have been looking for a story about Fitna that doesn't explicitly mention Fitna in the summary, since they no doubt wish to avoid getting some death threats of their own.

    --
    >north
    You're an immobile computer, remember?
  4. Re:How ironic... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The religion is what? 300 hundred years old?
    More like 1500 years. But that is not the point.

    Whereas I do not doubt that everything shown in the film has happened, I do think that it is highly selective; someone trying to stir up trouble against Muslims.

    There are people on both sides of this who are stirring the pot. I do not think that most muslims are seeking Jihad, however some are. I don't know enough about it. It is an error to put all muslims into one group, there are many different sects with different views, some benign, some not so.

    Whatever you do: don't take everything at face value.