Wikileaks

[otters~1]

You two both said the same thing, and it's just a semantic quibble. Who says our government is ever going to end up as bad as the one Orwell described? It's not a law of man. And it's obviously not happening right now.

I firmly believe that, at the current time, and in the foreseeable future, Wikileaks has a greater capacity for evil than for good.

[Tanner]

Who says our government is ever going to end up as bad as the one Orwell described? It's not a law of man. And it's obviously not happening right now.

I'm not talking about starting a rebellion here; I'm talking about keeping that from being necessary. Without any form of government oversight there is nothing to keep it from happening in the future. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

[otters~1]

Who says our government is ever going to end up as bad as the one Orwell described? It's not a law of man. And it's obviously not happening right now.

I'm not talking about starting a rebellion here; I'm talking about keeping that from being necessary. Without any form of government oversight there is nothing to keep it from happening in the future. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

When the so-called ounce has no negative consequences.

[Tanner]

Do you really think that having no political, corporate and military oversight will have no negative consequences?

[otters~1]

Do you really think that having no political, corporate and military oversight will have no negative consequences?

Oh, do we have no political, corporate and military oversight here in the States? I didn't realize.

[Tanner]

Do you really think that having no political, corporate and military oversight will have no negative consequences?

Oh, do we have no political, corporate and military oversight here in the States? I didn't realize.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not. I'm not aware of any civilian oversight of military programs in the United States outside of what's already been mentioned in this thread.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I'm not aware of any civilian oversight of military programs in the United States outside of what's already been mentioned in this thread.

There are plenty of civilians playing important and influential government roles.
Besides which, it's not like time spent in the armed forces dehumanizes you.

[Tanner]

There are plenty of civilians playing important and influential government roles.

If the person or group in question are employed by the same organization that they are meant to be providing oversight for, they will hardly be giving the most reliably unbiased testimony available.

[Sunset]

Wikileaks is just a place where people can dump all their finds of something/someone, and expect something in return.

[Tanner]

Wikileaks is just a place where people can dump all their finds of something/someone, and expect something in return.

It's safe to assume that we all already what, exactly, Wikileaks is since we were, a month ago, having a goddamn discussion about it. You didn't need to resurrect this to tell us something we already knew.

[otters~1]

I'm curious to know whether the new Wikileaks issue has changed any minds. Most recently, Amazon has ousted Wikileaks from its server space. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technol ... uters.html

And, of course, Assange has become an international criminal. It's been sixty-odd years since the US executed someone for treason....

[scythe]

Wikileaks is just a place where people can dump all their finds of something/someone, and expect something in return.

Having submitted documents to Wikileaks (that were later posted), I can say you don't get shit in return.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I think it's a terrible state of affairs we've gotten ourselves into if there can be that much damage caused by holding countries accountable for their actions. I'm generally a cynical and misanthropic person, but even now I feel like a complete idiot for having had as much faith in any government as I ever did. Like, seriously, fuck everyone.

Assange has become an international criminal.

The charges against him are very clearly fabricated. All of the greedy, snake-tongued, evil motherfuckers who get exposed by WikiLeaks want to jump at any excuse to take out Julian Assange. At no point do truth or ethics become obstacles for them.

[SlappyMcGee]

http://gizmodo.com/5703490/secretary-of ... -wikileaks

is how i feel

[noops]

http://gizmodo.com/5703490/secretary-of ... -wikileaks

is how i feel

Wow, he is such a badass. I'm not really sure how I feel myself, but I think that he's... Pretty cool.

I have a question that I'm hoping of you might answer: What about the government's right to privacy? The corporation's? Do they not have the same rights that we provide to our neighbors? Or has this been discussed in the near-towerposts earlier in this thread?

[SlappyMcGee]

http://gizmodo.com/5703490/secretary-of ... -wikileaks

is how i feel

Wow, he is such a badass. I'm not really sure how I feel myself, but I think that he's... Pretty cool.

I have a question that I'm hoping of you might answer: What about the government's right to privacy? The corporation's? Do they not have the same rights that we provide to our neighbors? Or has this been discussed in the near-towerposts earlier in this thread?

Fuck, why should corporations be entitled to anything? They are a loophole in the law, given to create an entity without morals that is entirely motivated by profit, and you want to give them a right to privacy!

And how can representative government ever make sense with a hidden agenda? There was a really great interview with John Stewart a few years back, when Bush was still in office. He pointed out that the Republicans seemed to think it was more important that we never found out they made a mistake rather than apologizing for mistakes and moving on.

Which is true enough. The reason I appreciate that quote is because it cuts through the bullshit. I can't criticize the war because it hurts the troops. I can't know about sensitive military information because WHAT IF THE TERRORISTS KNOW TOO?

In Starcraft, if your strategy is actually a strategy and not just pathetic noob cheese, then it should work regardless of whether your opponent sees it or not. You've prepared for what they have, and so have they. It's only if you have a super wonky build that you can eke out a win based entirely on surprise.

The government is like a bad Starcraft player.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

how can representative government ever make sense with a hidden agenda?

This is pretty much what matters most to me.

if your strategy is actually a strategy and not just pathetic noob cheese, then it should work regardless of whether your opponent sees it or not.

There's a saying in the field of security of that "security through obscurity is no security at all". Modern cryptography, for example, has a completely open implementation -- any asshat has full access to the guts of the algorithm, because the strength of the encryption doesn't depend on knowing the implementation details. I think this extends nicely to most competitive strategy. I accept, of course, that sometimes the best strategy is one that requires that the opponent be ignorant of it, but world governments appear to think that this is always the case.

In fact, I finished watching a National Geographic documentary just last night about the Secret Service, and apparently their primary means of preventing counterfitting currency is by adding hidden features (watermarks and such) to the bills and hoping the counterfitters don't notice them. It surprised me that anyone could expect this to work for any appreciable length of time.

[scythe]

of preventing counterfitting currency is by adding hidden features (watermarks and such) to the bills and hoping the counterfitters

Since you made the same mistake twice,

counterfeit

that is all.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

of preventing counterfitting currency is by adding hidden features (watermarks and such) to the bills and hoping the counterfitters

Since you made the same mistake twice,

counterfeit

that is all.

Hm.
Y'know, I went up to state-wide spelling bees when I was a tot, but I think my spelling ability has declined sharply since then. And it's not like I used to practice or anything, back when I was still good at spelling.

[otters~1]

In fact, I finished watching a National Geographic documentary just last night about the Secret Service, and apparently their primary means of preventing counterfitting currency is by adding hidden features (watermarks and such) to the bills and hoping the counterfitters don't notice them. It surprised me that anyone could expect this to work for any appreciable length of time.

It's not that they don't expect the features to be noticed (although some aren't, I'm sure), it's that they know that even if they're found, the hidden stuff is almost impossible to copy. Hell, hold a bill up to the light and you can see it's watermark. Unfortunately, according to the documentary I watched, Iran is currently waging economic warfare against us. It takes government pull and money to get hold of the right counterfeiting equipment these days, apparently.

EDIT: It's a good damn thing Assange raped someone, else the warrant might never have been issued. At least he'll be tried for something. Meanwhile, terrorists who now know exactly where are undersea communications lines are, will destroy them. What a world.

[乳头的早餐谷物]

After some deliberation, I've come up with two reasons to support Wikileaks—the second one is the most important in terms of defending the practical effects of the release of classified information.

Wikileaks merely distributes the information; if anyone is going to be charged with a criminal act, it should be whoever originally obtained the classified information and gave it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks is merely a publisher, just as the newspapers are, and to criminalise this would be to set a terrible precedent that would essentially kill serious journalism.

Furthermore, if this information has ended up on Wikileaks, it is probably relatively easy to access. That is to say, if there was someone with access who was prepared to take the personal risk to release this information to Wikileaks, there are most likely others with access who would give away this information after being bribed or threatened or if they were motivated by a radical ideology. It is thoroughly possible that terrorists and other nefarious figures already have this information. By bringing it to wider public scrutiny, Wikileaks could well be making things safer by removing the illusion of security through obscurity and bringing potential vulnerabilities and issues (as well as, you know, the truth) to light.

[SkyPanda]

"And, of course, Assange has become an international criminal. It's been sixty-odd years since the US executed someone for treason...."

Assange is an Australian citizen and does not hold US citizenship, and therefore cannot commit treason against the US.

Also, the man's a national hero, no matter what Gillard says. We like our outlaws* :)






*even when they're not technically outlaws

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Oh, I found this recently:

So Why Is WikiLeaks A Good Thing, Again?

[blackson]

I believe that there is some merit to some privacy in the government. If they're open about anything and everything they do, other countries will listen. The United States telegraphing their moves seems like a silly idea to me. I'm content understanding that I don't know everything about my government. I trust how the US treats its citizens and I trust it will continue this trait. And if I don't like it? I'll quietly move to another country when I'm able.

[Tanner]

I trust how the US treats its citizens and I trust it will continue this trait. And if I don't like it? I'll quietly move to another country when I'm able.

If you're happy with the way the US treats its citizens at this point, it's probably because you aren't aware of how bad you've got it. From lopsided taxation to public medicine to government lobbyists to TSA screening procedures, you should be outraged. Your apathy is part of the problem.