On 12 Oct 2004, at 22:22, Magnus Manske wrote:
Yann Forget wrote:
What's disturbing in this story is that this
treaty which is made to
fight "international terrorism, kidnapping and money laundering" is
subverted for dealing with a political issue. Indymedia might be
wrong, but using against them this kind of treaty made for criminal
cases really endangers free speech and democracy.
How this is different that what the Chinese government does?
Unknowingly, you offer the perfect soultion: Have a wikipedia backup
server in China! If the FBI closes the US site, the Chinese government
will *love* us ;-)
Magnus
''Earnestly'' folks, that ''is'' a good idea, IMHO:
By intelligently leveraging discrepancies between different
jurisdictions, we should be able to establish a position of strength,
where our standards as regards freedom of information can be set based
on a "legal least common ''multiple''" instead of a "least
common
denominator".
The only issue: If we were to use true mirrors, the replication traffic
would be insane.
Instead, the primary, active copy of different countries' Wikipedias
could be located on the servers in the respective countries/on the
respective continents, with "only" scheduled replication to all other
sites. This could of course mean losing the very latest contributions
at a site in case it is taken offline. Then again, maybe even the
cross-global replication traffic would actually be bearable. After all,
only the actual ''changes'' would need to be replicated.
Yes, I confess: I'm an MCSE (among other things).
I was young and I needed the money.
-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
www.ropersonline.com