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

Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 465 posts

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#181

Post by ShamelessC »

Theodores wrote: post #103
chiefalchemist wrote: post #32

First, I want to say I'm not dismissing the validity of the sexual assault charge. That's a serious change, and it should be addressed via proper legal channels. That said, having watched (the film) "Untouchables" for the Xth time, it's certainly possible given the powers involved he could be getting the Al Capone treatment. Put another way, how or why he ends up in jail isn't nearly as important as him ending up in…

I think we have a lot of growing up to do regarding the Swedish law concerning equality. My suspicion is that Sweden are 50 - 100 years ahead of the UK and the rest of the English speaking world when it comes to treating women with respect as a society and in law. In our own mis-spent youths we assume some laws don't apply to us, it can be a simple thing like riding a bicycle on a pavement (sidewalk). Then we might f…

> It is not rocket science to create a web page and post documents online, the idea you need Wikileaks for that - to filter it for you - is ridiculous.

It seems doing so anonymously might be a bit tricky for folks without technical knowledge. Hell, I'm a programmer and I still would be afraid to publish without the guarantee of anonymity provided by a "trusted" third party.

They also provide protection for people who they deemed to have aligned interests - e.g. Snowden.

I agree though that there shouldn't be a filter on what gets leaked. But it may be necessary given the fact that the US government has the resources and laws that it does.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#182

Post by austincheney »

slg wrote: post #29
apsec112 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, First Amendment protections apply to non-Americans. However, as you say, Assange is being prosecuted for conspiracy to hack computers, not for his speech.

Non-Americans are certainly protected by the Constitution while in the US, but I thought there was still a legal debate about whether the US Constitution fully applies to foreign nationals while outside the US. Hasn't that long been the legal excuse used for things like international mass surveillance and what goes on in Guantanamo Bay?

Guantanamo Bay is American soil similar to embassies in foreign cities.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#183

Post by jessaustin »

uryga wrote: post #145
pytester wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value on behalf of Manning and encouraging him to leak more information (Obama's DOJ refused to make this charge because it's something all journalists do).

that'd be "encouraging her", unless you're not referring to Manning here?

Good point, but some leniency is probably in order. We certainly want to honor Ms. Manning's wishes, but they weren't yet publicly known at that time.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#184

Post by overgard »

txru wrote: post #143
calhoun137 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly feel like you comment is a perfect illustration of this point made in the OP, which was as much about citizens as it was about what politicians would like them to think: "just fathom the authoritarian mindset that would lead a citizen -- and especially a "journalist" -- to react with anger that these things have been revealed; to insist that these facts should have been kept concealed and it'd be better if…

Trust me, I'm aware of the thin lines that these things ride upon. I don't care that, in particular, the Podesta emails, the DNC emails, the Brazile questions, or anything else about the Clinton campaign were leaked. It was information, and it was illuminating to the nature of American politics. What I have a problem with is, these sorts of leaks allow American elections to become a target of nation-state attacks. We…

I don’t see how that makes sense in practice in a globalised world with the internet. The information is going to come from everywhere, and given the way the US meddles, our elections are of interest to practically every country. OF COURSE they’re going to try to influence our elections. Even a brief glance at our own history shows us doing that to, uh, practically every other country. It’s only going to get more pronounced! I see no practical way of achieving what you want other than burying our heads in the sand.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#185

Post by TrainedMonkey »

jancsika wrote: post #177
calhoun137 wrote: post #94

It's unsurprising that political leaders would want to convince people that the true criminals are those who expose acts of high-level political corruption and criminality, rather than those who perpetrate them. Every political leader would love for that self-serving piety to take hold. But what's startling is how many citizens and, especially, "journalists" now vehemently believe that as well. In light of what WikiL…

At the same time, this convergence of equivocation on First Amendment protections provides the perfect opportunity for a simple yet effect filter. 1. Start with the set of all potentially serious journalists. 2. Filter out the ones who put forth arguments which downplay the dangers to the press of prosecuting Assange. 3. Filter out the ones who don't explicitly argue against prosecuting Assange on 1st Amendment groun…

Step 4 - live in a bubble where you are always correct forever.

Filtering out everyone who happens to disagree with your opinion is a good way to get stuck in an echo chamber.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#186

Post by belltaco »

austincheney wrote: post #182
slg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-Americans are certainly protected by the Constitution while in the US, but I thought there was still a legal debate about whether the US Constitution fully applies to foreign nationals while outside the US. Hasn't that long been the legal excuse used for things like international mass surveillance and what goes on in Guantanamo Bay?

Guantanamo Bay is American soil similar to embassies in foreign cities.

Embassies aren't "foreign soil". There are restrictions based on international treaties, but they're nothing like foreign soil at all.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#187

Post by toofy »

ng12 wrote: post #179
haberman wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you're missing GP's point. Even if we stipulate that leaks are in the public interest (inasmuch as they expose corruption), selective leaks give an undue amount of power to the person deciding what to leak. If we were getting a similar number of leaks from the DNC, RNC, USA, non-USA, etc. I honestly wouldn't have a problem with it. When the leaks are all focused in one direction though, it looks less like…

You're not wrong but there's nothing to be done about it. You either have freedom of speech/press or you don't, you can't have "freedom of speech as long as you're fair".

What people seem to be missing here is, the ideals the community held when we lined up behind and helped propel Wikileaks forward went far beyond freedom of speech—it was deeply anti-propaganda, it was deeply anti-power, the releasing of all information— Julian made a conscious choice to become the monster we were all fighting, a propagandist who selectively hid information or selectively amplified certain information—this is quite literally the same thing we were fighting to stop.

We’re lining back up to fight for his freedom of speech, but he will forever be a study in why we must metaphorically “kill your idols.” Anyone who knows what we were fighting for knows that Julian abandoned the freedom of information cause long ago.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#189

Post by nocturnial »

roywiggins wrote: post #149
nocturnial wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very poor analogy and I think you know it. Cracking the password isn't the same as using it to log in. There are still some extra steps required. In the case of picking locks there are no extra steps, you gain access immediately. I'm only critizing the analogy, what he did, or tried is still illegal but it's barely a hack attempt and it's obvious they are desperate to charge him with anything, no matter how…

That's how conspiracies work. Each participant does only a part of the overall conspiracy. If I forge a document and give it to you so you can sneak into a secure area and commit a murder, I am not just guilty of forgery, I am guilty of conspiracy to murder. They guy who drives the getaway car is guilty of murder as much as the people who walk into the building. This is the entire point of conspiracy law. Driving a c…

I think you read over the part where I said it was illegal.

You don't need to invent scenarios, you can use the facts of this case.

Manning already had access and didn't need the password to be cracked. Wikileaks already received information from Manning. Someone in the chat log told Manning they would pass the hash to someone else. They then told Manning "no luck so far".

Keep in mind, they haven't provided any proof that the person Manning was talking to was Assange. They haven't provided any proof that Assange did in fact try to crack it He never wrote that he would try, only that he would pass it on. Or that he actually send the hash to someone else to crack it, and that this person did in fact tried to crack it.

And to top it all off, Manning did not need the password in the first place! People keep forgetting this. The case against Assange appears to be very weak and is probably only intended to get him on US soil to question him about things other than what he is charged with.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#190

Post by belltaco »

thanatos_dem wrote: post #150
belltaco wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is doing math a form of expression? Breaking a password amounts to thinking for a very long time about all the ways you could rearrange some bits, and choosing one. I'd call it an expression of preference for certain possible results over others, by way of saving one and letting the rest go. Isn't shooting a gun at someone a matter of depressing a lever? It's about applying pressure on a lever with your finger. >Sti…

> Are you deeply uncomfortable with the thought of govt jailing you for literally doing nothing? Yes? I’d be concerned for anyone who isn’t. And to be clear... he didn’t crack it. I’ve run password hashes through rainbow tables for shits and giggles. Should I be dragged out of an embassy next?

Sorry if I was unclear, that quote is in continuance of the earlier line, full argument:

>Isn't running into and maiming a pedestrian while driving a car at a traffic crossing a matter of actually doing nothing instead of braking? Are you deeply uncomfortable with the thought of govt jailing you for literally doing nothing?

>And to be clear... he didn’t crack it.

Attempting to commit a crime is a crime even if you failed at it.

>I’ve run password hashes through rainbow tables for shits and giggles. Should I be dragged out of an embassy next?

People shoot at the range all the time but are not prosecuted. But gun murderers are. Dont you see the difference?

Were you cracking an Administrator password of the United States Military protecting classified war logs with an intent to distribute them to the public?

Post reply on HN