5 ms·

This article doesn't make it clear what was actually leaked. Was it the actual private info or links to it? Was this info already publicly available? Honestly t

This article doesn't make it clear what was actually leaked. Was it the actual private info or links to it? Was this info already publicly available? Honestly this article seems like retaliation for the earlier DNC leak and is heavy on accusations, light on facts.

foobarqux 10y ago
The article is incoherent because it originally accused Wikileaks of publishing the documents but was then corrected to state that Wikileaks only linked to documents published by third parties.
skybrian 10y ago
Anyone who has been paying attention knows that WikiLeaks has always been careless about sharing private information that puts ordinary people at risk. The only time they've been somewhat responsible is when they partnered with newspapers who know better. The DNC leak for example includes lots of social security numbers and credit card numbers. If they cared at all they could have done a search and replace to get most of them.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  I would rather they didn't manipulate or censor their leaks. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
  - vkou 10y ago
    Would you mind sharing your SSN, credit card numbers, address, and date of birth? We don't yet know if that information will be useful to the world, because we didn't really look at it, but we'd like to have it out in the public record - for completion's sake. I'm sure it'll be valuable to someone. I realize that you may not be involved in any impropriety, but you may have at one point e-mailed someone who is, or someone who works for someone who is. No more secrets, right?
    - exstudent2 10y ago
      You should blame the people who made the leaks necessary, not the people doing the leak. Again, manipulating the data in anyway undermines their legitimacy.
      - zardeh 10y ago
        What makes a leak "necessary"? For better or worse, this group believes that practically anything secret should be leaked.
        EdHominem 10y ago
        A leak is necessary when it demonstrates the government or the leaders are lying. There's zero democracy when the citizens aren't told what's going on.
        zardeh 10y ago
        But this is not the only information that wikileaks is leaking, so they seem to ascribe to another definition.
        EdHominem 10y ago
        Not really, no. Everything Wikileaks has leaked has been something that shouldn't have been secret. In some cases we wish it would have stayed secret, but that's our fault (collectively) for breaking our own laws. For instance, had we properly investigated the behavior of our troops in Iraq there wouldn't have been a need to blow the whistle on the situation.
      - notahacker 10y ago
        I'm not sure it ever was "necessary" for Wikileaks to indiscriminately release large collections of emails sent to the Turkish government, especially if the HuffPo report is correct and it pertains largely to ordinary citizens' messages. "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" is even less true of releasing citizens' sensitive information to the entire world (including factions in a country where people are being killed over their political actions) than it is of allowing governments to collect and share it. Just because some of the things revealed by Wikileaks are very much in the public interest doesn't make it an entirely benign actor.
  - unethical_ban 10y ago
    The purpose of the leak is to reveal information the public should see, which is useful in analysis of the org. Seeing xxx-xx-xxxx vs an innocent persons SSN doesn't change the leak.
- davidf18 10y ago
  > The DNC leak for example includes lots of social security numbers and credit card numbers. Someone should teach people that you don't put SSN, CC, and other information in emails. Also, best not to put in emails things that you'd later not like made public (like getting angry at people and writing things you'd regret). I believe people got fired for what they said in the Sony hacks.
  - skybrian 10y ago
    Yes, there is plenty of blame to go around. This doesn't let Wikileaks off the hook.

foobarqux 10y ago

The article is incoherent because it originally accused Wikileaks of publishing the documents but was then corrected to state that Wikileaks only linked to documents published by third parties.

skybrian 10y ago

Anyone who has been paying attention knows that WikiLeaks has always been careless about sharing private information that puts ordinary people at risk. The only time they've been somewhat responsible is when they partnered with newspapers who know better. The DNC leak for example includes lots of social security numbers and credit card numbers. If they cared at all they could have done a search and replace to get most of them.

exstudent2 10y ago
I would rather they didn't manipulate or censor their leaks. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
- vkou 10y ago
  Would you mind sharing your SSN, credit card numbers, address, and date of birth? We don't yet know if that information will be useful to the world, because we didn't really look at it, but we'd like to have it out in the public record - for completion's sake. I'm sure it'll be valuable to someone. I realize that you may not be involved in any impropriety, but you may have at one point e-mailed someone who is, or someone who works for someone who is. No more secrets, right?
  - exstudent2 10y ago
    You should blame the people who made the leaks necessary, not the people doing the leak. Again, manipulating the data in anyway undermines their legitimacy.
    - zardeh 10y ago
      What makes a leak "necessary"? For better or worse, this group believes that practically anything secret should be leaked.
      - EdHominem 10y ago
        A leak is necessary when it demonstrates the government or the leaders are lying. There's zero democracy when the citizens aren't told what's going on.
        zardeh 10y ago
        But this is not the only information that wikileaks is leaking, so they seem to ascribe to another definition.
        EdHominem 10y ago
        Not really, no. Everything Wikileaks has leaked has been something that shouldn't have been secret. In some cases we wish it would have stayed secret, but that's our fault (collectively) for breaking our own laws. For instance, had we properly investigated the behavior of our troops in Iraq there wouldn't have been a need to blow the whistle on the situation.
    - notahacker 10y ago
      I'm not sure it ever was "necessary" for Wikileaks to indiscriminately release large collections of emails sent to the Turkish government, especially if the HuffPo report is correct and it pertains largely to ordinary citizens' messages. "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" is even less true of releasing citizens' sensitive information to the entire world (including factions in a country where people are being killed over their political actions) than it is of allowing governments to collect and share it. Just because some of the things revealed by Wikileaks are very much in the public interest doesn't make it an entirely benign actor.
- unethical_ban 10y ago
  The purpose of the leak is to reveal information the public should see, which is useful in analysis of the org. Seeing xxx-xx-xxxx vs an innocent persons SSN doesn't change the leak.
davidf18 10y ago
> The DNC leak for example includes lots of social security numbers and credit card numbers. Someone should teach people that you don't put SSN, CC, and other information in emails. Also, best not to put in emails things that you'd later not like made public (like getting angry at people and writing things you'd regret). I believe people got fired for what they said in the Sony hacks.
- skybrian 10y ago
  Yes, there is plenty of blame to go around. This doesn't let Wikileaks off the hook.