Slashdot Mirror
PayPal Freezes the Assets of Wikileaks.org
matsh sends word that PayPal has frozen the assets of wikileaks.org. From their Web site: "Paypal has as of 23rd of January 2010 frozen WikiLeaks assets. This is the second time that this happens. The last time we struggled for more than half a year to resolve this issue. By working with the respected and recognized German foundation Wau Holland Stiftung we tried to avoid this from happening again — apparently without avail." The submitter adds: "Hopefully we can pressure PayPal to resolve this quickly, since this seems like a dangerous political decision."
Still amazed that no one at wikileaks has seen http://www.paypalsucks.com/ yet. No way I would trust paypal with anything, ever.
you forgot bags of weed, ass grass or cash is my moto
Hows that working on your website?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those three things basically responsible for the proliferation of the internet? Some more than others, I suppose.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
That would simply screw the small-time investor,
Good. The small-time investor who is not scrupulous about choosing his investments, and instead makes them based on monetary decisions, is as much to blame for the power of the corporation as anyone else. In the aggregate, they manage to do an amazing amount of damage. If you had to be choosier about your investments based on the corporation's potential to fail the ethics test, then perhaps people would be a bit more moral about what they do with their money.
I have absolutely zero sympathy for someone who loses their ass because they invested in evil. I feel that the fact that you do says something very bad about you.
No, what you need to do is hold the CEO personally responsible for everything a corporation does.
This will never work without limits. I have an alternate, similar proposal. Limit executive salaries to the sum of the people who work directly for them, and force them to share the responsibility if any of those people commits a crime during the course of their work. This helps solve the problem of ridiculous executive salaries and institutes a reasonable chain of responsibility. Attempting to induce someone to commit a crime is itself a crime, so it also provides a means of limiting people attempting to induce their underlings (or underlings' underlings) to commit a crime, although of course it does not eliminate it. But it will of course encourage whistleblowing!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"