5 ms·

Ask HN: What non-financial ways can I/we help Wikileaks?

71 points by fooandbarify 16y ago

We've all been watching Wikileaks take a beating from the powers that be, and even though I might take issue with the way in which they handle some of their information I think their cause is important and I find it deplorable that the big guns (Amazon, Paypal, EveryDNS, etc.) would try to essentially kick someone off the internet rather than at least allowing free speech to take place. I don't have a lot of money right now (bootstrapping a startup while my last one sits in the clutches of an evil marketing megalomaniac), so donating to Wikileaks is not really an option. I do have a fair amount of technical expertise (as compared to the general public, at least - maybe not compared to the community here or the staff at WL). What can I do to help them, and does anyone else want to get on board?

steveklabnik 16y ago
Don't stop the support once it's no longer frontpage news. As for details... I'm wondering myself. I feel too much like a slacktivist so far.
lsb 16y ago
Their main goal is in disseminating information. The front page is just the wrapping paper. If you want to further their goals, seed their torrents.
- fooandbarify 16y ago
  As I noted in a different reply - I agree with you, but I think the wrapping paper is very important for a large segment of their audience. Believe it or not, I know many people who grew up with computers and yet don't know what a torrent is or how to use them. Beyond seeding torrents, I would like to make sure that people know how to find the information.
kilian 16y ago
You can support the release of information, and wikileaks, by seeding their torrents: http://thepiratebay.org/search/wikileaks/0/99/0 http://thepiratebay.org/search/wikileaks/0/99/0 Or you can be a public backup; mirror the wikileaks site like the dutch "schock blog" Geenstijl did: http://mirror.geenstijl.nl/20101203-wikileaks/213.251.145.96/index.html http://mirror.geenstijl.nl/20101203-wikileaks/213.251.145.96...
- rue 16y ago
  How much space does the mirror take? Edit: not much, <15MiB. Got some torrents seeded now, thanks for pointer.
  - kilian 16y ago
    For those interested, this is a torrent for a mirror of today's website: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6009610/Wikileaks_Offline_Mirror_-_By_Palatinux http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6009610/Wikileaks_Offline_Mi...
- fooandbarify 16y ago
  I like this idea and will begin seeding their torrents post-haste. However, how do we make sure that the people who need to see the information find the torrents?
TGJ 16y ago
Wait, at what point did releasing classified information, treason, become something worth supporting? Edit: I love it. Downvoted. Information is classified for many reasons. Some of which are because some information may help the US's enemies. That is treason. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. You only know now that the information released was not of high caliber. You only know that after 1 man decided to release these documents. If this 1 man decides to continue to release information, one day he may release something more substantial that could actually harm the US. You downvote me for what? Because you don't agree that it's treason? Or you simply support someone releasing classified information. You don't get to break the law and then later claim that it's not that bad. He broke. the. law.
- FluidDjango 16y ago
  I'll agree that embarrassing information was released. But I think the allegation of "eleasing classified information, treason..." needs to be proven ( at least better evidenced ) before suppression by governmental (quasi-governmental?) retaliation.
  - TGJ 16y ago
    See, it's only with hindsight that you get to know that it was simply embarrassing information. Before it was released, it could have been a myriad of things all of which could have easily been treason because it may have aided our enemies.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  For something to be treason you have to meet certain criteria, wikileaks meets just about 0 of those.
- gloob 16y ago
  Not everyone is American. Not everyone is bound by American law.
  - 16y ago
jdp23 16y ago
Great question -- and great suggestions elsewhere in the thread. One very useful thing to do is boycott Amazon over this, and ask your friends and family to do so as well. It's easy enough: - buy books and DVDs elsewhere this holiday season - ask any friends and family not to buy via Amazon - post about it on your Facebook (and your blog if you have one) Amazon made a business decision not to stand up for free speech. If they take a beating as a result, other companies will think twice before doing the same.
dammit 16y ago
Wikileaks activists and whistleblowers rely on Tor. Assange has publicly stated that by running a Tor relay you can help the backbone infrastructure. Wikileaks would not exist without Tor. http://www.torproject.org/ http://www.torproject.org/ http://www.torservers.net/ http://www.torservers.net/ If you are a coder, donate your time and help with development (irc.oftc.net, #tor)
- jacquesm 16y ago
  The hard part about running a Tor node for me has always been that you're helping the bad guys just as much or even more as you're helping the good guys, make sure that you know what you are getting in to before running a Tor node.
  - dammit 16y ago
    If you ask Tor exit node operators, they all share the same experience: Abuse is very low in comparison to the traffic they're pushing as a whole. And yes, technology can be misused. So can a hammer. Tor protects everyone. Who is to judge about what is "bad" and what is "good"? US Government? Google? There's an estimated number of at least 10,000 bridge users EVERY DAY. I don't think any criminal would go through the pain of using bridges, so that must be people behind firewalls in totalitarian countries. Also, if you're up to something not good, it's always easy. As a criminal you can buy bot nets, pay servers with stolen credit cards, etc.
    - tptacek 16y ago
      Pretty straightforward to make the good/bad judgement about child pornography. (I like Tor; unlike WL, my Tor reservations are entirely technical).
      - MoreMoschops 16y ago
        Except that countries differ in their legal definition of what a child is.
  - 16y ago
mmcmmc 16y ago
Also consider those who won't be savvy enough to look to torrents but still need the info. Mirror the sites and distribute the links across social networks. Consider sharing with the UK, FR, ES, DE & US journalists who had a preview of the cables prior to going public. They may be able to disseminate to interested general public more efficiently.
raheemm 16y ago
Write to your politician/newspaper in support for wikileaks
- jdp23 16y ago
  great suggestion. and phone them, too.
sl_ 16y ago
The problem at the moment is that wikileaks can't handle the growth both in terms of submitted documents and volunteers lining up to help. Daniel Domscheit-Berg said in a german interview a few months ago that they have a full inbox for programmers willing to extend the plattform, but they don't have any resources to review the applications nor the "middle management" to coordinate them. Also Assange has put no effort into changing this in favour of releasing these "big" scoops. So: at the moment there probably isn't much you can do in terms of direct involvement.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
jdp23 16y ago
send a holiday card to Bradley Manning (the alleged whistleblower, currently in the brig in Quantico) http://www.bradleymanning.org/15364/holiday-cards-for-bradley-mannings-freedom/ http://www.bradleymanning.org/15364/holiday-cards-for-bradle...
kgroll 16y ago
Regardless of your favored method of distribution, make sure you consider the consequences of sharing classified documents. Those consequences are probably negligible for the overwhelming majority here, but for anybody anticipating getting a US security clearance within the next seven years, you're likely shooting yourself in the foot. You'll either have to reveal the fact that you've disclosed classified material, or else lie under oath. Neither of those being ideal if you're trying to get that job. It also conflicts with your clearance if you're already holding one. I'm not saying you should or shouldn't support Wikileaks. Just make sure you give it adequate thought before jumping on a torrent.
- fooandbarify 16y ago
  Interesting point. I currently do some work for a different federal government which involves some security clearance. I may need US security clearance in the future, and the conflict is something I hadn't considered until now. However (and I usually try to avoid ideological soapboxes, but), I believe that government should exist for the people, and not the other way around. I'll take my chances. Sincerely though, thanks for pointing that out. It may have more immediate/drastic consequences for others and should certainly be taken into consideration.
- jackolas 16y ago
  It's absurd. It's public knowledge now. They're trying to threaten the bourgeois intellectuals. DOn't give into this baseless (Baseless in precedent I don't know how much they get to discriminate based on politics) threat. Also if State et al. don't hire anyone interested by the cables I think we might be slightly screwed later.
  - kgroll 16y ago
    Rather than get into the ethics of it, I was simply hoping that people would pause, even if just for a second, to make sure they were comfortable being involved. I'm not trying to sway people either way. I agree with you - you can't put Pandora back in the box. I don't, however, think that changes the classification of the leaked documents. When judging an individual's fitness for a security clearance, I imagine that they're looking more at character traits than specific instances of undesirable behavior. Sharing these documents that are already "public knowledge" is only noteworthy because it may indicate that you're not uncomfortable with the idea of releasing classified documents if it's for a cause you believe in. (Just speculating here) >>Also if State et al. don't hire anyone interested by the cables I think we might be slightly screwed later I disagree with this. I can think of a handful of reasons somebody lacking interest in these cables would still want to work for the government. Example: To do engineering work for a defense contractor, you'll undoubtedly need a secret+ clearance. You might seek such positions for the job security they provide. Or maybe you're interested in working with cutting edge technology that isn't necessarily available at more budget constrained (IE commercial) companies. Many of the engineers working at a high technical level are drawn to the technology, not the politics. To reveal any bias, I should note that I do contract work for the US government.
pbiggar 16y ago
I suppose one way to help is by sending them leaks. I hear they're looking for corporate leaks now, so they could certainly be helped by people who have evidence of corporate wrongdoing.
pconf 16y ago
Amazon, Paypal, EveryDNS, and now Wells Fargo. Tried to make a credit card donation this morning after hearing about the mafia-style business tactics and Wells put a block on my card! I called and had the block lifted, then asked to file a complaint, but the manager said I could not follow-up nor would they issue a complaint number! You might not be surprised by something like this in Russia, but I live in the US!
dammit 16y ago
http://piratenpad.de/CBlttttTHT http://piratenpad.de/CBlttttTHT

fooandbarify 16y ago

To a certain extent, I actually agree with your point. I think it is important for governments to be able to operate within varying degrees of secrecy, and I think that despite Assange's insistence to the contrary, some of the Wikileaks documents place "innocent" civilians in serious danger. My counterpoint is twofold: maintaining secrecy and security is the responsibility of the government(s) involved. Chasing Wikileaks after the fact and twisting the arms of those they do business with only lends credence to the fact that the parties involved failed to protect classified information. If Wikileaks was able to get it, so would anyone bent on causing harm. The mere fact that Wikileaks released it exposes serious security flaws. Punishing them for that is akin to punishing hackers who expose a Windows vulnerability instead of selling it to the highest bidder - enormously foolish in my opinion. The second counterpoint is maybe more important: the fact that the US government chooses to silence Wikileaks by making them the pariah of internet business sets an extremely poor precedent, should the internet allow them to succeed. I think most HN users agree that net neutrality is a good, important thing. I suspect most of us agree that internet censorship on the scale of the Chinese firewall is damaging. (Note: I and probably many others agree that things like child porn are a good thing to try to keep off the internet, and the distinction in my opinion is that society has a responsibility to protect children as much as we can.) So then why would we allow government and big business to shut down a website that is holding them up to a journalistic standard they aren't used to?

phamilton 16y ago
Here's my assumption: Somebody released classified information. Somebody committed treason, violated their oaths, etc. Assange most likely was not the one. There is nothing wrong with Wikileaks, but I find it to be wrong that somebody leaked classified documents. Supporting Wikileaks is not wrong directly, but sites like Wikileaks provide incentive to those with classified information to leak it. That is not something I want to see happen.
- fooandbarify 16y ago
  I find it to be wrong that somebody leaked classified documents. I think it's more complicated than that. "Following orders" is not an acceptable defense, and for that reason I think leaking classified documents is not only sometimes justifiable but that it is sometimes an absolute necessity (ie. in the case where classified documents are the only evidence of a crime). Most of the time, though, you're probably right - classified documents should remain secure. Sites like Wikileaks provide incentive to those with classified information to leak it. Part of my point in the previous post was that if there is a weak point in an organization, there will be a leak. I think there is enough incentive for information leaks without Wikileaks - I have no source for this but I suspect that the diplomatic cables alone would have been worth millions in the black market before the leak. Wikileaks is actually one of the safest places for this information to go.