4 ms·

Data has qualities of the inverse of decay and what you see initially when looking at it on your own is only its half-life. This release shows very clearly to a

by cyphunk 12y ago

Data has qualities of the inverse of decay and what you see initially when looking at it on your own is only its half-life. This release shows very clearly to anyone but the absolute naysayer that the sony data has political and legal ramifications that deserve public attention. Now the public will have the chance to uncovering other kernels of interest and truth, which wikileaks could not possibly accomplish by sitting on the data. In light of blaring illegal activities I do not see how you could question this. Further, I don't see how one could find bringing the collusion between multinational corporations and governments to the light of day as not being worthwhile. Even if it may not always reveal illegal activity it enlightens the public. This is why regardless of what you see on the surface of a data trove erring in the direction of release is likely wise.

cm2187 12y ago
I don't see any illegal activity yet. Political donations is something perfectly legal and transparent.
- cyphunk 12y ago
  What of the claims that Sony orginised methods to get around the $2000 limit of donations? I'm curious if this would be illegal, and if not I feel it should be. And even if there are reasons for it to be legal, I'm grateful I at least can learn about it when it happens.
  - cm2187 12y ago
    From the email I read, that relied on executives making a donation of their own money. I don't see how this different from any other appeal. And in any way political donations are publicly available, you don't need leaked emails to identify them.
    - fineman 11y ago
      Making six $3k deposits in a row isn't a crime. Doing so to avoid the reporting limits, is. It might turn out that because of some quirk of law that intentionally getting around donation restrictions isn't illegal (which is presumably should be, just like the banking regulations...) but even if so it's still pretty clearly an end-run around the intent of the law and that's a pretty scummy thing to do. Especially because I think it's pretty easy to see the easily coercive nature of this. After all, donations are publicly visible... I wouldn't expect to be fired for not, but I would expect not to be promoted unless I did.

by cyphunk 12y ago

cm2187 12y ago

I don't see any illegal activity yet. Political donations is something perfectly legal and transparent.

cyphunk 12y ago
What of the claims that Sony orginised methods to get around the $2000 limit of donations? I'm curious if this would be illegal, and if not I feel it should be. And even if there are reasons for it to be legal, I'm grateful I at least can learn about it when it happens.
- cm2187 12y ago
  From the email I read, that relied on executives making a donation of their own money. I don't see how this different from any other appeal. And in any way political donations are publicly available, you don't need leaked emails to identify them.
  - fineman 11y ago
    Making six $3k deposits in a row isn't a crime. Doing so to avoid the reporting limits, is. It might turn out that because of some quirk of law that intentionally getting around donation restrictions isn't illegal (which is presumably should be, just like the banking regulations...) but even if so it's still pretty clearly an end-run around the intent of the law and that's a pretty scummy thing to do. Especially because I think it's pretty easy to see the easily coercive nature of this. After all, donations are publicly visible... I wouldn't expect to be fired for not, but I would expect not to be promoted unless I did.