I have no idea where you're coming from with this statement. Wikileaks is exposing the corruption of power, be it in politics, bureaucracy, the banking sector, wherever. The information they've released is relevant for all Americans to understand their power structure -- regardless of any political stripe (note they don't favour the Democrats over the Republicans), as well as those whose countries wheel and deal behind closed doors with the United States.

While I think it would be very helpful to have an organization dedicated to releasing information specific to very particular cases, Wikileaks does a great job of releasing general information important for all of us.
--

Information is the key to democracy

If you mean matured enough that it's become the one of the main entry points for malware on PCs and still tries to insist I install an annoying Yahoo toolbar every time we update it, then I would have to say it's not mature enough for me.

No, don't pay attention to the FUD artists. 9.8 million goes to "technology" costs, including 1.8 for existing hosting costs, and 3.3 in new capital expenditures on their data centers.

I think everyone knows Wikipedia has its issues with the editing process, but their overall management appears very transparent and well-intentioned. Any organization that grows so fast is going to have problems along the way, but I don't understand why some people need to go out of their way to make wikipedia itself seem evil.

You link is correct, but your statement is 100% wrong.

If you'd read the document you linked to, you would see the real figure for 2010/11 is 8.9 million for 91 people, including the costs of recruiting and benefits, which would be somewhat significant. In 09/10 there were only 47 employees.

Regarding the 9.8 million, this includes 1.8 million for their data centers, and 3.3 million in building out the data center in new capital expenditures, and most of the rest for what seems to be quite normal developer and IT salary costs.

Your question/point of "what is an advertisement?" is likely the best one to focus on. I have no problem at all with advertising based on the content of a page, but have a huge issues with doubleclick, facebook connect and their like, who would track users and what they browse.

Still, to create and manage a worldwide ad-server which can't be taken advantage of is not a simple task. One might even suggest they'd need to raise a very large amount of donation money in order to build and maintain it through the opening stages.

Like many mods have suggested, this is an "interesting" idea. It's also completely without any reference and seems to be a serious accusation. Wales' appeal states that wikipedia does need the money for its website, while you say they're lying, and that it's just a siphon.

Your comments are stated as facts, but you give a note at the bottom suggesting it's just opinion.

I'm suggesting that until you give some valid reference that the money is going to sister projects, that your post is full of FUD and not much else.

Wikileaks is like many an open source project: lots of things to do, not many people to do everything, so they need to focus on the interests of the "programmers", in this case headed up by Assange. Your comments sound like many a poster that is against the direction of the way a software project is going. Don't like it? Then either get involved to effect the direction, or do your own thing. No skin off anyone's back.

Actually, it is like you can't find them. All personal laptops are 16:9, while some higher priced business laptops are 16:10, but both are a far cry from the old 16:12 (4:3), perfect for image viewing, and requires a lot less scrolling in a day.

But you really, truly can't find any of the old 4:3 resolutions in a ~14" laptop by any company (nor almost all other sizes). For anyone who uses their computer primarily to read and write documents, they will have a loss in productivity (more scrolling, less context available for the subject at hand) in choosing a 14" widescreen, over a 14" old 4:3 laptop.

I find it amazing that no laptop-maker is extending even a single product to those that would prefer the 4:3 ratio.