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

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

wikileaks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 201 posts

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#91

Post by njs12345 »

tokenadult wrote: post #17
AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #6

I really, really hope the culture of leaking information becomes so strong that governments will become incapable of keeping anything a secret. That would give me some hope for the future. Anyone that leaks information is a fucking hero. Edit: Stop attacking me personally. I'm talking about the government's privacy here, not mine (nor anyone else's). I actually think my privacy will improve if this becomes a reality.

I really . . . hope . . . that governments will become incapable of keeping anything a secret. Does that include personal information about you, for example your personal medical information that is part of the treatment records of a government-administered medical insurance plan? Some countries (not many) make personal income tax filings public information. Do you live in such a country?

I always liked the idea of making income tax filings public. Seems like it would make catching people who are dodging tax and the relevant discussions around it a lot easier.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#92

Post by Camillo »

nikcub wrote: post #8

The content isn't interesting[1] because bilateral free trade agreements are public[0], and having the USA force partners into accepting patent enforcement, copyright laws like the DMCA etc. are well known What is a little interesting is the negotiations and diplomacy at work. You can see how each country is trying to further its own position and interest. Looking at this version of the document, it is impossible to…

> The content isn't interesting[1] because bilateral free trade agreements are public[0]

That's like saying that weather forecasts aren't interestings because the weather is public. The point is that we want to have a public discussion on these agreements before they are signed.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#93

Post by ihsw »

ars wrote: post #72
ihsw wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with these kinds of things is that the document might be watermarked to obviate who leaked it. It follows the same vein as "spying on allies" which -- until recently -- was tin-foil-hat conspiracy territory. The political fallout will not be minimal, and it will not be kept secret.

> spying on allies" which -- until recently -- was tin-foil-hat conspiracy territory. What? Nations have been spying on each other, including allies, since the invention of spying. > The political fallout will not be minimal The fallout will be so minimal as to be non-existent. Nations already know allies spy on them, it's not in any way surprising. It also doesn't really bother them. They have to protect against all…

I'm not talking about fallout from spying, but from finger-pointing. The US will find out who leaked the document, and they will act accordingly.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#94

Post by unreal37 »

balabaster wrote: post #68
swombat wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've made my company fully transparent, including, for example, all salary information. Most of those steps seemed very scary at first. In hindsight, there was nothing to be scared about, really. This is not to say that extreme transparency applied to all things is right - just that it often looks a lot more scary than it is. When you act transparently you relinquish some control, and some people hate the very idea o…

The salaries of all your employees? Doesn't that violate their own rights to privacy? Or does this only extend to the board of directors?

Is there such a thing as a right to privacy at work? The employer can install cameras, monitor computer usage, monitor entry and exit... there's no privacy at work, including what your salary is.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#95

Post by fixermark »

CalRobert wrote: post #75
jellicle wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even better, what if the government was closing in a child pornographer with chemical weapons and a nuke, and the leak allowed him to rape more children while nuking a nunnery and poisoning an orphanage?

My god, it would be 911 times 2,356.

Yes, the dreaded 2,146,316, as foretold by Nostradamus.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#96

Post by husein10 »

I think it's absurd that these negotiations were shrouded in such secrecy in the first place. These rules, if implemented, will have a massive impact on how the global economy will work. Yet, the public, who will end up living under the yoke of these rules, not only has very little direct input into the process but didn't (until today) even have a clear view of what rules were being considered.

I don't see how one can have a modern democracy if rules are made in what was (before the leak) a black box.

Hopefully this will lead to more transparency for these types of negotiations in the future. Leaking/spreading this leaked information should help show those with political power that this type of closed door process is not going to be palatable to a connected and informed public.

These types of international agreements tend to stick around for a long time once they are implemented. So, expending energy on the front end to get a more balanced agreement that works for everyone impacted, not just those with an invitation to sit at the table, will save a lot of trouble later on.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#97

Post by swombat »

_mulder_ wrote: post #69
swombat wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've made my company fully transparent, including, for example, all salary information. Most of those steps seemed very scary at first. In hindsight, there was nothing to be scared about, really. This is not to say that extreme transparency applied to all things is right - just that it often looks a lot more scary than it is. When you act transparently you relinquish some control, and some people hate the very idea o…

Would you mind posting your company salary information here? I've always been interested to see how a real-life startup salary structure looks. Or is it only transparent if you're in the club?

That's an interesting challenge. We've posted revenue numbers on our blog, but not salary information. That said, the first job ad we put out will have pretty clear salary information, so, ok, I'll answer.

Here's the payscale in short, then. There are 2 main roles within the company: client management and sales.

Salespeople get £20k p.a., plus a 15% commission on sales, plus a share of the bonus pool. The base salary never goes up according to the current scheme.

Client Managers get £28k p.a., plus a share of the bonus pool, but their salary goes up by £2k/quarter for the first year, £1k/quarter after that, up to £40k.

The bonus pool is calculated by taking all the turnover, halving it, then deducting overheads, commissions and base salaries. The remainder is the bonus pool, split in a number of shares.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#98

Post by swombat »

balabaster wrote: post #68
swombat wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've made my company fully transparent, including, for example, all salary information. Most of those steps seemed very scary at first. In hindsight, there was nothing to be scared about, really. This is not to say that extreme transparency applied to all things is right - just that it often looks a lot more scary than it is. When you act transparently you relinquish some control, and some people hate the very idea o…

The salaries of all your employees? Doesn't that violate their own rights to privacy? Or does this only extend to the board of directors?

Why would it violate any rights to privacy? What rights are you talking about, anyway?

The only thing we don't share openly in this manner is personal health problems.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#99

Post by g8oz »

ninkendo wrote: post #47
Eye_of_Mordor wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately governments are obliged to reveal their 'secrets' despite any misgivings, since they are acting on our behalf. They know this, they don't like this and they have utterly failed us.

> Unfortunately governments are obliged to reveal their 'secrets' despite any misgivings What if the electorate decides that a government should keep certain things secret from them? Directly at the ballot box or through their representatives? I think in the US we have done so when we allow or congressmen to continue to renew the patriot act. For good or ill, the government keeping things secret for national security…

The electorate has done no such thing. The expansion of institutionalized secrecy in government by our representatives is an example the principal-agent problem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal–agent_problem

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

#100

Post by [deleted] »

mcphilip wrote: post #34
AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #6

I really, really hope the culture of leaking information becomes so strong that governments will become incapable of keeping anything a secret. That would give me some hope for the future. Anyone that leaks information is a fucking hero. Edit: Stop attacking me personally. I'm talking about the government's privacy here, not mine (nor anyone else's). I actually think my privacy will improve if this becomes a reality.

It's not quite so simple as considering all leaks of government information heroic. For instance, would it have been heroic to leak news that U.S. code breakers had cracked enemy codes in WW2?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN