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

Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#11

Post by wmeredith »

jarek wrote: post #5
maximilian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so I wiki'd what patronymics are (your "last" name is based on your father's name), but could you elaborate. Did the author use "Jónsdóttir" incorrectly?

Yes. Birgitta Jónsdóttir is properly referred to as Birgitta Jónsdóttir or just Birgitta, or by her first and middle name if disambiguation is required. Jónsdóttir alone is meaningless as far as name goes. Icelandic phone books are ordered by first name. edit: although to be fair, in the context of an article written in English aimed at a general audience this is not an easy situation. Properly using just the first n…

Whatever. Good writers write for their audience. This article was written for an audience residing outside of Iceland.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#12

Post by avar »

lenni wrote: post #10
adamdecaf wrote: post #2

That, and them passing bills allowing same-sex unions makes me want to move there. Nice job Iceland!

Many countries have same-sex unions/partnerships and some even proper marriage but Iceland has the first openly gay head of state.

Many have some sort of same-sex unions, what Iceland did recently is eliminate all occurrences of "man and a woman" and replace them with "two persons" in their laws.

Most countries that have same sex unions have a different set of laws for them, usually for religious and political reasons. The Church of Iceland opposed the recent change, but it lost that battle.

Regarding Jóhanna, it's sad that the first openly gay head of state is also so openly incompetent :)

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#13

Post by Groxx »

Rod wrote: post #9
jcl wrote: post #8

Maybe a bigger issue: What will it mean for file sharers? A private, anonymous server that can't be shut down by foreign powers sounds like a file sharer's dream come true.

Didn't they try that in Sealand? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/haven.html Apparently it didn't work all that well.

I thought part of the problem there is that, while they declared themselves independent, nobody would recognize their independence, thus they were still effectively under the laws of the area they were in.

If Iceland, an already-recognized nation, decides to do this, trying to get things shut down without their consent could / would be seen as an attack, and it becomes a far larger issue than simply enforcing laws within your jurisdiction.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#14

Post by electromagnetic »

wmeredith wrote: post #11
jarek wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Birgitta Jónsdóttir is properly referred to as Birgitta Jónsdóttir or just Birgitta, or by her first and middle name if disambiguation is required. Jónsdóttir alone is meaningless as far as name goes. Icelandic phone books are ordered by first name. edit: although to be fair, in the context of an article written in English aimed at a general audience this is not an easy situation. Properly using just the first n…

Whatever. Good writers write for their audience. This article was written for an audience residing outside of Iceland.

I read a ton of articles that routinely use a persons first name, why suddenly should proper formality be artificially upheld in context of a culture that uses patronyms? They use first names as names, and in the context of an article they can use a first name without it getting confusing.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#15

Post by ggchappell »

jarek wrote: post #5
maximilian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so I wiki'd what patronymics are (your "last" name is based on your father's name), but could you elaborate. Did the author use "Jónsdóttir" incorrectly?

Yes. Birgitta Jónsdóttir is properly referred to as Birgitta Jónsdóttir or just Birgitta, or by her first and middle name if disambiguation is required. Jónsdóttir alone is meaningless as far as name goes. Icelandic phone books are ordered by first name. edit: although to be fair, in the context of an article written in English aimed at a general audience this is not an easy situation. Properly using just the first n…

This appears to have been fixed.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#16

Post by Rod »

Groxx wrote: post #13
Rod wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't they try that in Sealand? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/haven.html Apparently it didn't work all that well.

I thought part of the problem there is that, while they declared themselves independent, nobody would recognize their independence, thus they were still effectively under the laws of the area they were in. If Iceland , an already-recognized nation, decides to do this, trying to get things shut down without their consent could / would be seen as an attack, and it becomes a far larger issue than simply enforcing laws w…

Iceland may be a sovereign nation, but it has no armed forces. It's fair to say that its defense consists of its alliance with NATO, i.e., with the U.S., which implies that if the U.S. says "jump!", Iceland will ask "how high?". Considering that the U.S. government is owned by interest groups, I don't see how Iceland can become a data-haven.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#17

Post by sh1mmer »

avar wrote: post #12
lenni wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many countries have same-sex unions/partnerships and some even proper marriage but Iceland has the first openly gay head of state.

Many have some sort of same-sex unions, what Iceland did recently is eliminate all occurrences of "man and a woman" and replace them with "two persons" in their laws. Most countries that have same sex unions have a different set of laws for them, usually for religious and political reasons. The Church of Iceland opposed the recent change, but it lost that battle. Regarding Jóhanna, it's sad that the first openly gay…

Regarding Jóhanna, it's sad that the first openly gay head of state is also so openly incompetent :)

Care to elaborate?

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#18

Post by papachito »

Rod wrote: post #9
jcl wrote: post #8

Maybe a bigger issue: What will it mean for file sharers? A private, anonymous server that can't be shut down by foreign powers sounds like a file sharer's dream come true.

Didn't they try that in Sealand? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/haven.html Apparently it didn't work all that well.

Wasn't that because Sealand is not really a country, unlike Iceland?

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#19

Post by mvalle »

Rod wrote: post #16
Groxx wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought part of the problem there is that, while they declared themselves independent, nobody would recognize their independence, thus they were still effectively under the laws of the area they were in. If Iceland , an already-recognized nation, decides to do this, trying to get things shut down without their consent could / would be seen as an attack, and it becomes a far larger issue than simply enforcing laws w…

Iceland may be a sovereign nation, but it has no armed forces. It's fair to say that its defense consists of its alliance with NATO, i.e., with the U.S., which implies that if the U.S. says "jump!", Iceland will ask "how high?". Considering that the U.S. government is owned by interest groups, I don't see how Iceland can become a data-haven.

I doubt the US will ever invade Iceland. It will have massive consequences for the US government, it might be controlled by interest groups, but they are not all powerful, the people still do have a say.

It will be much more difficult to convince a Kentucky farmer that the US should invade Iceland with it's white Christians, as supposed a strange-sounding nation with non-white non-Christians(sad, but true).

And though Iceland doesn't have a military, it does have friends who do. It is interesting entertaining the idea of a US invasion of Iceland. It would result in an immediate hostility towards the US from many nations, as it would be to attack a friend(if they attack Iceland, they can attack us), especially from the Nordic region(whose commercial powers are not to sneeze at).

Anyways, data safe-heaven, great idea.

Re: Iceland passes the "Wikileaks law". What will it mean for journalists?

#20

Post by Rod »

mvalle wrote: post #19
Rod wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iceland may be a sovereign nation, but it has no armed forces. It's fair to say that its defense consists of its alliance with NATO, i.e., with the U.S., which implies that if the U.S. says "jump!", Iceland will ask "how high?". Considering that the U.S. government is owned by interest groups, I don't see how Iceland can become a data-haven.

I doubt the US will ever invade Iceland. It will have massive consequences for the US government, it might be controlled by interest groups, but they are not all powerful, the people still do have a say. It will be much more difficult to convince a Kentucky farmer that the US should invade Iceland with it's white Christians, as supposed a strange-sounding nation with non-white non-Christians(sad, but true). And thoug…

(sigh)

Dude, seriously... who's talking about invading Iceland? Are you out of your mind? I never even suggested that!!!

Did the MPAA / RIAA mafia need the U.S. military to invade Sweden to shut down The Pirate Bay's servers a few years ago? That's right, they didn't. They merely contacted their obedient, corrupted "friends" in Washington D.C., and had the U.S. government pressure the Swedish government, and the Swedish government had the Swedish police raiding The Pirate Bay... even though Stockholm is way out of U.S. jurisdiction.

Sweden has professional armed forces, defense and high-tech industries, natural resources, land. Sweden needs the U.S. less than Iceland does. This means that the U.S. can pressure Iceland whenever it wants, and Iceland will obey because the small and the weak don't make the rules. International relations are, essentially, bullying. It sucks, but being in denial won't help.

Post reply on HN