81–90 of 105 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know what they are. But do you think it's a coincidence that after a dull two years of leaks, this leak occurred in the same month the UK ignored the UN ruling in his favor? He's playing his next card. I have no idea what his motives are, do you?
Try reading your comments out loud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thing is, Italy is not a world power with dominance in information technologies and global ambitions.
Well, the USA should mind its own business and fuck off. Too harsh? Ops. You spy and start wars in others countries and expect it to be ok?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree that the NSA acted as intended, I wish to add with a moderately tangential discussion by saying that organizations ought not be viewed under the lens of their chartered purpose, but rather their function. An organization's function is the set of all its capabilities. We should seek to define the purpose of a state entity by limiting its function via mechanism, rather than by hoping for good people to do…
It's a useful exercise analyzing the actual function of the NSA and comparing it against its charter. Is the NSA doing its chartered job? How well? Is it being effective? Does it have too much actual power? It certain doesn't seem as if it has effective oversight in this matter, based on comments from congresspeople as to the level of information they are given. In this instance, it seems as if the NSA is doing their…
Too bad the newspaper decided to go with the "NSA is spying on x president" headline rather than focusing on the content of the spying (involving details relevant to Italian politics and history) which is clearly the intended goal in releasing this. The responses here on HN are sadly predictable as a result and likely will draw a similar response from the public. Wikieaks has never really had a moral agenda like Snow…
To Wikileaks, the credible threat of future leaking is probably more important than the single leak of past infractions, because the threat impedes the flow of internal communications, which makes an "unjust" organization's internal "thought processes" more costly and less efficient.
Proven NSA involvement basically means there's no cheap way to keep high stakes secrets safe from leaking. The NSA has the bigger budget and better technology, so you can't defend against this path of leaking. Yet NSA leaks too, so it seems NSA can't defend themselves, either.
Taken together, this says nobody can defend against leaking: That's Wikileaks' most favored state of affairs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the USA should mind its own business and fuck off. Too harsh? Ops. You spy and start wars in others countries and expect it to be ok?
If you want a serious answer based on how things actually work, it's this: the US Government doesn't expect you to be ok with it. They're not asking your permission. They do not care if you dislike it. The goal is to have the upper-hand on specific types of information globally.
From the point of view of democracy the USA is the worse.
Too bad the newspaper decided to go with the "NSA is spying on x president" headline rather than focusing on the content of the spying (involving details relevant to Italian politics and history) which is clearly the intended goal in releasing this. The responses here on HN are sadly predictable as a result and likely will draw a similar response from the public. Wikieaks has never really had a moral agenda like Snow…
even aside from Snowden leaks, this exactly what those guys are there for. if they weren't doing it, they wouldn't be doing their jobs...
and i agree, the specifics are the interesting part of this.
Too bad the newspaper decided to go with the "NSA is spying on x president" headline rather than focusing on the content of the spying (involving details relevant to Italian politics and history) which is clearly the intended goal in releasing this. The responses here on HN are sadly predictable as a result and likely will draw a similar response from the public. Wikieaks has never really had a moral agenda like Snow…
> Wikieaks has never really had a moral agenda like Snowden in regards to why they are releasing the information in the first place. Assange has repeatedly stated that he simply believes all secret information should be released. In the process they hope to expose corruption in the political systems
This isn't a fair assessment. They do have a moral agenda, though perhaps haven't been very good at explaining it to the public.
You should read Julian Assange's short essays written before wikileaks was started to get a picture of it. There is a strategy. https://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf
For once, NSA spied on right guy. Corruption, minors, drugs, frauds, links to the Russian gov... there's a lot to be concerned about