prospectacle writes:
"An important choice remains for this site. What kind of organisation will we be, practically, legally and financially?
A for-profit, shareholder corporation seems out of the question, by general consensus (correct me if I'm wrong), but other questions remain. The basic choice is this:
Will we be like a charity, a co-op, or a recreational club?
This is a gross simplification, but gives some idea of the options involved. Feel free to offer alternatives. So what should we be, what is our purpose, really? And what kind of a structure is required to make sure we serve that purpose, and that money doesn't end up in the wrong pockets?
Bonus question: which jurisdiction should we set ourselves up in to fulfil our mission most effectively?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Thursday March 13 2014, @12:18AM
Being elsewhere in the world would make it more difficult. They have to tap the lines or bully a government or infiltrate a data center. With a US host, they just send a national security letter.
So seriously, anybody who hosts in the US (any of the 5 eyes really), simply does not respect their user's privacy.
Here's a list of decent countries for hosting, Iceland being in the list: https://nomadcapitalist.com/2013/12/15/top-5-best- countries-host-website-data-privacy/ [nomadcapitalist.com]- nsa-whistleblower/ [wnd.com]f g-iceland-free-speech-20110403 [latimes.com]
Some officials in Iceland would have welcomed a Snowden assylum request: http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/iceland-opens-door-for
Even before Snowden Iceland was looking to be privacy hub: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/02/world/la-
I can see no reason why SN should be hosted in the US. Why make it a cake walk for the NSA? Obviously if they want something bad enough they'll get it, but make the fuckers work for every bit, and they'll be stealing less stuff due to real world resource constraints.