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

CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

media.ccc.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 299 posts

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#261

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

tremon wrote: post #119
woodruffw wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm normally loathe to defend any aspect of the US MIC, but I think Pompeo's point is that Wikileaks knowingly publicizes information that has already been processed into Intelligence , and willfully turns a blind eye to its role as a laundromat for hostile powers under the guise of an ideology of totally free data. I, for one, think that all information should be free. I think Pompeo's motivations are suspect and ge…

chiefly benefits powers whose long term vision is the decline of liberal democracy. ...by exposing the hypocrisy of said liberal democracies. What good is a liberal democracy when the demos remains oblivious of the negative aspects what the cracy is doing? If things like the collateral murder videos, or the treatment of Manning and Snowden are the work of said "liberal democracies", then I'm fully in the camp that wa…

The power of liberal democracies is not that bad things never happen in them. The power is that despite all of that, people can still vote and make change. That's why we have amendments and legislature - we see wrong, we try to change it.

> If things like the collateral murder videos, or the treatment of Manning and Snowden are the work of said "liberal democracies", then I'm fully in the camp that wants to decline them, and replace them with better, more transparent, more accountable structures.

But that's not what will happen. Instead, populists will rise to power under the ruse of libertarianism, or going back to "the old ways." Eventually the nation will continue to divide itself until it collapses under internal infighting. Almost as if by design...

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#262

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

erentz wrote: post #154
e40 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is not equal is the asymmetry of the information. In 2016 (2015?) the information was skewed to that provided by Russian intelligence. If there were equal amounts of dirt on every politician, then fine, but there is clearly not. This is what bothers me about the whole thing. It can be manipulated by powerful states, and some of them are more willing to use it than others.

I would like to see the dirt on every politician also. But I'm not going to complain because I can only see the dirt on some of them. And if Wikileaks received information about Politician D and did not publish it because they did not have equal information about Politician R to release at the same time then they would be taking an editorial bias in favor of D. Now if you show that Wikileaks sat on information about…

How do you know Wikileaks does all of these things? How do you audit wikileaks?

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#263

Post by chinathrow »

richardARPANET wrote: post #227
seesawtron wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the questions from chat asked him exactly that. His answer was that he already lives in a government-sector in Berlin where he doesn't need cameras to feel safe at home. The main argument of this talk was about his experiences when he travelled abroad (UK/US) and experienced the surveillance and intimidation.

Sure, but they were in his home. If he had cameras streaming to a server recording everything they would stop doing that at least. (Or if they didn't, he would at least have evidence of the criminals faces)

It's not clear (from the talk) if they were in his home at all. He uses a stealth key, I guess the one from UrbanAlps where the key is 3d printend outside in.

https://www.urbanalps.com/

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#264

Post by [deleted] »

sudosysgen wrote: post #166
vbtemp wrote: post #132

Honest question, please don't snipe at me. Can someone please point me to significant leaks from out of china, russia, iran on wikileaks? Edit: since it appears no one can actually answer this question with an actual answer, and only down vote and troll, I think that probably means wikileaks does not make significant leaks from the military-industrial complexes of China or Russia.

Wikileaks is an English speaking website. All three of these countries aren't democracies, so whistle-blowers have no incentive to speak up. Finally, if you are from those countries and send info to Wikileaks, you would be sending information to a foreign organization which risks much harsher punishment. For all of these reasons, it is much much less likely for any leaker out of China, Russia or Iran to leak to Wikil…

[deleted]

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#265

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

sudosysgen wrote: post #239
shadowgovt wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's naive; I think you have correctly interpreted their goals and the ends those goals are structured to achieve. Total information awareness, to be used in circumstances where it's necessary for national security. Pull the scare quotes off and it's directly in line with the NSA's mission "to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances."

There is absolutely no reason why the use should be limited, now or in the future. In practice, the information will be fed to automated systems effectively putting everyone into surveillance, and I wouldn't be surprised if the number of manual pulls is in the 100 000 people per year range.

It's up to us to make sure the government doesn't abuse that privilege.

There is no reason why the use of the military on our own citizens should be limited either, yet we still have a military.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#266

Post by tremon »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #261
tremon wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

chiefly benefits powers whose long term vision is the decline of liberal democracy. ...by exposing the hypocrisy of said liberal democracies. What good is a liberal democracy when the demos remains oblivious of the negative aspects what the cracy is doing? If things like the collateral murder videos, or the treatment of Manning and Snowden are the work of said "liberal democracies", then I'm fully in the camp that wa…

The power of liberal democracies is not that bad things never happen in them. The power is that despite all of that, people can still vote and make change. That's why we have amendments and legislature - we see wrong, we try to change it. > If things like the collateral murder videos, or the treatment of Manning and Snowden are the work of said "liberal democracies", then I'm fully in the camp that wants to decline t…

we see wrong, we try to change it.

Exactly! But that's predicated on "we see wrong". What Snowden and Wikileaks (and the various paradise leaks) showed, is that there's a lot of wrongs we don't see.

Maybe I didn't specify this explicitly in my earlier post, but my core position is this: attacks on Wikileaks are attacks on the ability for the voting population to see the wrongs, and as such are attacks on democracy itself. It's ironic for the CIA to claim that Wikileaks "works towards the decline of liberal democracy", when the CIA itself is working to suppress democratic checks and balances.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#267

Post by shadowgovt »

bitcharmer wrote: post #258
scoot_718 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally tweeted that their goal was to fuck her over.

This statement could definitely use a source

"Literally" is carrying too much weight there.

They made extremely clear, however, that they thought a Clinton victory in 2016 would be dangerous for the world, while a Trump victory would reign in the worst tendencies of liberal leadership.

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks...

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#268

Post by Fnoord »

px43 wrote: post #126
shadowgovt wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wikileaks had an image of a Bank of America VP laptop with email discussion about the creation and exploitation of predatory loans, and a complete indifference to the eventual 2008 crash that they knew it would cause. How do we know this is true if the data was burned?

> How do we know this is true if the data was burned? Sadly we don't, and likely never will. Assange mentioned the laptop data and hinted at what it might contain in an interview. We do definitely know that a large cache of data got held hostage and eventually burned when fuckhead left. Like I mentioned before, there was a whole Benedict Cumberbartch movie made about the fallout there: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt18…

Using the term 'Dumbshit' or 'fuckhead' doesn't give your argument credibility.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#269

Post by kordlessagain »

> In February 2016, Assange wrote: "I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgment and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. ... she certainly should not become president of the United States."

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#270

Post by ric2b »

scoot_718 wrote: post #253
whatshisface wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep saying this, but never include the story. What's the meat behind the claim that they did this?

They were very open about their desired outcomes alongside their releases. They had the express goal of affecting the election, as expressed by their site and their twitter.

Got any links to those tweets?
Post reply on HN