Wikileaks

[grouch]

I started to post this in the Maggot area but that would be an insult to the maggots. I have no sympathy for a hacker who posts property of another entity for profit and when he is taken to task, his supporters wage cyberwar on anyone who doesn't want to get involved.

I think the two sex charges are a bit of a stretch but posting stuff online that was never released to the public, i.e. proprietary information, is just wrong. Yes, we have freedom of speech on this country. There are limits. Back in the late 1800's limits were placed by the Supreme Court. In other words, yelling fire in a crowded theater is not protected speech. Put private information that may get someone killed rates along with that.

The guy who gave the cybermaggot the information is now looking at 52 years in prison. Yet Wikileaks wants to keep getting money for possesion of stolen property.

[Eric]

I started to post this in the Maggot area but that would be an insult to the maggots. I have no sympathy for a hacker who posts property of another entity for profit and when he is taken to task, his supporters wage cyberwar on anyone who doesn't want to get involved.

I think the two sex charges are a bit of a stretch but posting stuff online that was never released to the public, i.e. proprietary information, is just wrong. Yes, we have freedom of speech on this country. There are limits. Back in the late 1800's limits were placed by the Supreme Court. In other words, yelling fire in a crowded theater is not protected speech. Put private information that may get someone killed rates along with that.

The guy who gave the cybermaggot the information is now looking at 52 years in prison. Yet Wikileaks wants to keep getting money for possesion of stolen property.

I think it's interesting that the same government that demands virtually unlimited access to our private dealings is in a tizzy now that the same standard has been applied to its dealings.

As far as "propriety" information: The government is owned by us - in theory at least. This idea that it is entitled to whatever it wants to do, merely by braying "national security!" is laughable.

Except of course, it's not funny.

God bless Assange and Wikileaks. He's doing what the corporate-owned press won't.

[chiph]

I think there'll be a fairly large disruption in the short term, but over the longer term, I think this sort of transparency will be a good thing.

So far as Assange -- I think he's the bravest man in the world at the moment. Going up against the entire US government and all it's allies.

Anonymous, on the other hand, has dragged the argument into the gutter with their attacks. It's a bit hard to take the moral high ground when your supporters are vandalizing digital properties.

Chip H.

[dom]

Anonymous, on the other hand, has dragged the argument into the gutter with their attacks. It's a bit hard to take the moral high ground when your supporters are vandalizing digital properties.

Anonymous would be doing small scale shit anyhow.

They are just using Assange enemies as their primary focus for the time being. He has about as much control of his supporters as Eric Peters has over us. His threats have only been information leaks, not hacking/cracking. -I think

[dBrong]

I see the problem from both sides...

The US was greatly deficient in protecting this info. As a Comp Sci person, I can't believe that a low level person could have access to all these doc's, and be able to copy them to a USB stick, or rip a CD.

For sure, the person who stole it, should be tried for treason.

I believe a 'leak' - when it revolves around a single issue: Pentagon Papers, Iran Contra, are valid.

But when an 'employee' steals a huge amount of info - that is unrelated - then it's not a leak, it's theft.

IMO Assange is walking a very thin wire, dealing with stolen documents, which are pretty much unrelated. Sorta like the National Inquire.

If Assange doesn't watch out, he may just 'go missing.'

[Eric]

I see the problem from both sides...

The US was greatly deficient in protecting this info. As a Comp Sci person, I can't believe that a low level person could have access to all these doc's, and be able to copy them to a USB stick, or rip a CD.

For sure, the person who stole it, should be tried for treason.

I believe a 'leak' - when it revolves around a single issue: Pentagon Papers, Iran Contra, are valid.

But when an 'employee' steals a huge amount of info - that is unrelated - then it's not a leak, it's theft.

IMO Assange is walking a very thin wire, dealing with stolen documents, which are pretty much unrelated. Sorta like the National Inquire.

If Assange doesn't watch out, he may just 'go missing.'

If the government of the United States weren't a corrupt and criminal enterprise - literally, a lawless fascist thing - then I would agree with you.

But given the enormity of the evil of the government that controls this country, I applaud anything that kicks it in the balls, or showcases its hypocrisy and duplicity.

[grouch]

Anonymous would be doing small scale shit anyhow.

They are just using Assange enemies as their primary focus for the time being. He has about as much control of his supporters as Eric Peters has over us. His threats have only been information leaks, not hacking/cracking. -I think

Assange has a long history of being a hacker. That's one of the reasons I have no sympathy for him. From what I've been able to check up on, I don't take anything in the news as fact until I can do so, he's a bit of a control freak. He's the type that is all for one and I'm the one, regardless of what it does to other people.

Keep in mind that some of the spammers and hackers that have been hitting this site may be using programs that he originated.