5 ms·

Let's assume for a moment that his choice was neither right or wrong: A crowd of people attacking an informant without being placed in his shoes. This group men

by ambiate 16y ago

Let's assume for a moment that his choice was neither right or wrong: A crowd of people attacking an informant without being placed in his shoes. This group mentality leads to ignorance leads to violence. Suppose for a moment, some korean spy was bragging about all the US documents they were funneling back to their government. These documents consisted of building names, employee's names, and a few other misc trails. Do we worry that the spy might obtain even more sensitive information and release it or ignore the spy completely and continue on with our daily lives? What if there was a man working at your mom's bakery leaking all of your mom's baking secrets/employee information and boasting about it on his facebook page. Would you let your mom know that this employee is letting everyone in the world know her address and she makes an excellent strawberry muffin? Hacker, civilian, crackhead, secretary, garbage man; whatever title, if you believe a person might be endangering your government, people, or rights(or baking secrets)... is it so wrong to alert an authority of the situation before it gets out of hand? Could he have stumbled upon some new nuclear weapon schematics that wiped out an entire continent and went "OH LOOK WHAT THE US IS DOING, MUST SHARE THIS?!" (BTW: I don't really understand why we push democracy on other countries. The best way to spread democracy is by example and let other countries adapt on their own, in their own way... rebellion, civil war, or civil disobedience or whatever new method springs up. Democracies don't just spring up over night, the US just got extremely lucky in forming its republic. Many lives were lost, rights were nonexistent, and somehow we still ended up at this point.) (Also, that soldier knew the risk of leaking documents in a time of 'war,' so, I feel no pity for his capture.) (I should also note that I know nothing of Lamo or bradass other than what I saw on the daily show. This video is just group stupidity.)

sophacles 16y ago
Wow your strawman is made of many little strawmen. My mom's baking recipe being leaked or not will not result in someone's death, nor will snitching on the leaker. Nuclear secrets likewise are a completely different story than outdated opsec. On the other side, not all instances of Authority are the same. Some should never be notified, others more often. Of course, you are basing all of this on the assumption that someone leaking X must necessarily possess NO ability to reason and choose wisely about what to leak next (if anything) -- an assumption that is in no circumstances warranted.
- ambiate 16y ago
  A 14 year old boy once found a botnet on an ircd. Instead of going to the ircops on the network, the boy infected himself and found the inner workings of the botnet and posted it on the internet. The internet was quite pleased with the boy's findings, but the boy did not assume that a certain group would obtain the server of the botnet and get access to it. The boy watched as the zombies spewed out all types of information to this certain group who had got admin access in the same way he had put forth in his discussion on the botnet. The boy learned that full disclosure is not always in the best of interests of everyone and still agrees with that in his 25 year old manhood. :(
- fdschoeneman 16y ago
  Outdated opsec? No. The documents Assange published via Wikileaks exposed innocent Afghan sources by name and by village. These people are now in danger and I've seen a report that at least one of them has now been killed. Personally I con't see any real sunshine value in leaking these particular documents but I'm amazed that Assange didn't take the time to sanitize them using plain old common sense. And I'm surprised that people don't see him for the thoughtless prick that he is. And for that, I'm afraid, he becomes the collateral murderer.
  - sophacles 16y ago
    You are correct, names of sources is different than both nuclear secrets and outdated opsec. Congrats, you understand one of my points. Amusingly, at the same time you commit the exact same error I was pointing out: The strawman attack. I was not stating a position on the nature of the original leak, but instead pointing out how there are situations with different ramifications and consequences. The most you can infer from my statements, without making assumptions, is that I am not fond of strawman arguments.
    - fdschoeneman 16y ago
      Thank you for the lecture on straw man. If you did not mean to imply that Assange's recent document dump was composed of nothing more than "outdated opsec" then please disregard my last comment. However on re-reading your comment I still think my assumption a reasonable one.

by ambiate 16y ago

sophacles 16y ago

Wow your strawman is made of many little strawmen. My mom's baking recipe being leaked or not will not result in someone's death, nor will snitching on the leaker. Nuclear secrets likewise are a completely different story than outdated opsec. On the other side, not all instances of Authority are the same. Some should never be notified, others more often. Of course, you are basing all of this on the assumption that someone leaking X must necessarily possess NO ability to reason and choose wisely about what to leak next (if anything) -- an assumption that is in no circumstances warranted.

ambiate 16y ago
A 14 year old boy once found a botnet on an ircd. Instead of going to the ircops on the network, the boy infected himself and found the inner workings of the botnet and posted it on the internet. The internet was quite pleased with the boy's findings, but the boy did not assume that a certain group would obtain the server of the botnet and get access to it. The boy watched as the zombies spewed out all types of information to this certain group who had got admin access in the same way he had put forth in his discussion on the botnet. The boy learned that full disclosure is not always in the best of interests of everyone and still agrees with that in his 25 year old manhood. :(
fdschoeneman 16y ago
Outdated opsec? No. The documents Assange published via Wikileaks exposed innocent Afghan sources by name and by village. These people are now in danger and I've seen a report that at least one of them has now been killed. Personally I con't see any real sunshine value in leaking these particular documents but I'm amazed that Assange didn't take the time to sanitize them using plain old common sense. And I'm surprised that people don't see him for the thoughtless prick that he is. And for that, I'm afraid, he becomes the collateral murderer.
- sophacles 16y ago
  You are correct, names of sources is different than both nuclear secrets and outdated opsec. Congrats, you understand one of my points. Amusingly, at the same time you commit the exact same error I was pointing out: The strawman attack. I was not stating a position on the nature of the original leak, but instead pointing out how there are situations with different ramifications and consequences. The most you can infer from my statements, without making assumptions, is that I am not fond of strawman arguments.
  - fdschoeneman 16y ago
    Thank you for the lecture on straw man. If you did not mean to imply that Assange's recent document dump was composed of nothing more than "outdated opsec" then please disregard my last comment. However on re-reading your comment I still think my assumption a reasonable one.