Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 182 posts

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#161

Post by sdegutis »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #160
sdegutis wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were trying to incite a moral revolution within the Catholic Church to conform to their own moral standards, but the Catholic Church is not a democracy, the morals and rules are not decided by the collective members of the Catholic Church, which is what makes this move downright unethical.

The rules are pretty arbitrary, and decided by councils of Bishops though. Trying to influence them, trying to bring the church out of the dark ages, can be seen by some to be laudable.

You're right, some will think so, but only those who are not familiar with how Catholic doctrine works.

The rules are not arbitrary. Things like the requirement to go to Mass on Sunday are man-made rules, but made by those with authority, and for very good well-thought-out reason. Regardless of whether you agree that their authority is valid, it's not arbitrary in the least.

And others are immutable laws of existence, like the fact that it is an impossibility for women to be ordained. It's like wanting to change the quantity of 3 (not the symbol but the actual number) to be 4. It's just simply impossible. These laws are not arbitrary either, they're solidly based in logical reasoning of philosophy and theology.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#162

Post by noobermin »

alphonsegaston wrote: post #43
crystaln wrote: post #11

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wikileaks released information the timing of which was clearly meant to influence the US elections in a very particular way. Secondly, Assange issued statements clearly indicating his intentions to harm Clinton, not promote transparency. Why would the NYT publish this obvious garbage without counterpoint?

We're living in strange days, and it's only gonna get weirder. NPR aired a pull your punches interview with a white supremacist today, the New York Times is publishing doublespeak missives from what increasingly appears to be either the useful idiots or willing collaborators of Russian intelligence services. It's like Trump malware has turned the mainstream media into a spam-serving botnet for a league of fascists.

The mainstream media cares about access to the elites. Now that they are in power, they will lift them up and hide things that hurt that access.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#163

Post by JoeAltmaier »

sdegutis wrote: post #161
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rules are pretty arbitrary, and decided by councils of Bishops though. Trying to influence them, trying to bring the church out of the dark ages, can be seen by some to be laudable.

You're right, some will think so, but only those who are not familiar with how Catholic doctrine works. The rules are not arbitrary. Things like the requirement to go to Mass on Sunday are man-made rules, but made by those with authority, and for very good well-thought-out reason. Regardless of whether you agree that their authority is valid, it's not arbitrary in the least. And others are immutable laws of existence…

Well. They used to be different, how about that? For instance priests being celibate was just a marketing move. Doesn't sound so immutable.

History shows the 'laws' were as fungible as the situation required.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#164

Post by hackuser »

xnull2guest wrote: post #157
hackuser wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all the hallmarks of misinformation campaigns: 1) How do we know the email, provided by Russian intelligence, is real? Do we take Russian intelligence at face value? > "Spring" means a fake, externally organized revolution that is seen as legitimate because it aggravates insiders to the cause. 2) An unfounded allegation, part of a misinformation campaign: Make enough of them and be angry enough, and A) peop…

FUD. Trying to involve conspiracy theories about intelligence agencies. Trying to motivate a list (of two?) "hallmarks" that are neither a list nor hallmarks. Regarding Spring, the Arab Spring was externally organized. It fed on real desires of real people inside of autocratic regimes. For another example, take a look at the "Cuban Spring" and Zunzuneo. In any case, please stop spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt.…

If you would substantiate what you say, I might be interested in responding. As it reads, it's anger and loose accusations.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#165

Post by hackuser »

xnull2guest wrote: post #158
hackuser wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who don't know, that is right out of the Russian propaganda talking points. Note the complete lack of substantiation; sensational, inflammatory claims have a bizarre way of causing people to stop thinking and asking the question: Is there any credible evidence, or is this just part of the endless BS that fills our world?

I would say that his post is highly corroborated with what I've read from Stratfor and other leaked documents (not through Wikileaks). Indeed, the CIA have terms for different kinds of propaganda. White propaganda is true things that aide your message. Black propaganda false things that aide your message. Grey in the middle. This is definitely right out of the Russia "white propaganda" playbook, as the history fully…

Would you provide some evidence to the rest of us?

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#166

Post by hackuser »

sdegutis wrote: post #161
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rules are pretty arbitrary, and decided by councils of Bishops though. Trying to influence them, trying to bring the church out of the dark ages, can be seen by some to be laudable.

You're right, some will think so, but only those who are not familiar with how Catholic doctrine works. The rules are not arbitrary. Things like the requirement to go to Mass on Sunday are man-made rules, but made by those with authority, and for very good well-thought-out reason. Regardless of whether you agree that their authority is valid, it's not arbitrary in the least. And others are immutable laws of existence…

I respect your belief that these things are immutable, but the belief of many is that it's not true. These are rules of men, and if they wanted to change them then IME with many such immutable principles in many contexts, they suddenly find a way.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#167

Post by hackuser »

sdegutis wrote: post #159
hackuser wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to evidence of any of this? Organizing people for a political cause is not a conspiratorial front, it's democracy. That's the fundamental means of participating in it.

They were trying to incite a moral revolution within the Catholic Church to conform to their own moral standards, but the Catholic Church is not a democracy, the morals and rules are not decided by the collective members of the Catholic Church, which is what makes this move downright unethical.

That isn't evidence; it would be great if this discussion could be informed with it, because now all we have is more and more noise from more and more people, making it harder to get to the truth.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#168

Post by hackuser »

grandalf wrote: post #74
hackuser wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would have happened to Hillary's emails if WikiLeaks would not have existed? You mean the alleged (never verified) DNC emails. Hillary's emails were released by the FBI and in response to a lawsuit.

Many of the emails were proven authentic via DKIM signatures.

I searched and found no credible source supporting this claim. Do you know of one?

Wikileaks makes the claim, and some very partisan sources repeat it, but that's all I see.

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#169

Post by hackuser »

grandalf wrote: post #70
hackuser wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe strongly in transparency as a way to prevent corruption, but spreading misinformation doesn't stop corruption, it furthers it. It doesn't 'shine a light', it creates shadows where a brutal dictator can hide while he hurts others. Look up "useful idiots" to understand the role they played. It's too easy to cite principle such as "transparency" in order to ignore the difficult questions of responsibility and…

> Wikileaks is the epitome of the propaganda and fake online news that influenced the U.S. campaign Did you notice that Wikileaks showed via DKIM signatures that the vast majority of the emails were cryptographically proven to be unaltered. After that the notion that the emails were doctored vanished.

Please see my response here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12984303

Re: Why the World Needs WikiLeaks

#170

Post by hackuser »

xnull2guest wrote: post #79
hackuser wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe strongly in transparency as a way to prevent corruption, but spreading misinformation doesn't stop corruption, it furthers it. It doesn't 'shine a light', it creates shadows where a brutal dictator can hide while he hurts others. Look up "useful idiots" to understand the role they played. It's too easy to cite principle such as "transparency" in order to ignore the difficult questions of responsibility and…

I would characterize US media as the most prevalent source of misinformation for Americans. From the outright lies, blatant propaganda and media manipulation that dragged America into the Iraq War, to the despicably hallow coverage of the Syrian proxy war with context like the genocide in Bahrain completely whitewashed, all the way to silly equivocations like "Trump and Putin are best friends" or "Putin got a boobjob…

That's an interesting story, but it's not my experience and I see little to substantiate it.

Certainly all media organizations have real flaws and make serious errors, but that is true of all human institutions (name an exception!). Wikileaks is no exception either.

But there are large differences of degree. I feel like you describe the ideal of Wikileaks but not the reality. Transparency is a great ideal, but everything is a bad idea in the extreme - Wikileaks shouldn't publish information that puts lives at risk, for example, or helps the political ends of clearly bad people (and I know sometimes it's hard to draw the line between bad and good, but not always). The reality is that they were Useful Idiots (the technical term, not an insult) for Russian intelligence, and appear to have their own biases and vendettas.

Post reply on HN