normiss 798 #51 August 21, 2012 Which leads me back to the hacking into and stealing of information. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #52 August 21, 2012 QuoteNone of your comparisons are stealing other people's information. You made several references to hacking and theft, but that did not occur here. A solider with access to the information gave it to Wikileaks. Obvious crime committed by Bradley. Journalists, otoh, live off "stolen" information all the time: sources speaking "off the record," grand jury testimony leaked intentionally or not. The reporter doesn't give a fuck if it's stolen or being shamelessly provided, only if it is true. If Bradley and Assange had published Chinese documents, you'd laud them as heroes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #53 August 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteAgreed. However, simply hacking into someone else's secured information and simply copying and pasting is clearly NOT journalism. Why not? You don't approve because it posted sensitive (but mostly boring) US information. To an extent, I agree with you that in the latter stages wikileaks stopped exercising much editorial direction and just barfed volumes of material. But it's still publishing. The Examiner chain of newspapers and websites will print just about anything. Slate doesn't have a printed edition, but it's much better example of journalism than most newspapers and magazines today. Its a interesting question, what constitutes as journalism in the age of the internet? Some journos have been very snooty in denouncing Assange as not a journalist as he has no training in journalism. This argument is not valid in my view as neither has the award winning Ross Kemp. I don't believe that Assange is a journalist for the following reasons. A) He fails to protect his sources. B) He is not selective in anyway in what he publishes. C) He doesn't present the information in a way in which the average person can understand and digest. D) He publishes with total disregard for the consequences. E) He is irresponsible and has published information that will get people killed. (eg: British Army Translators names and personal details in Iraq). F) He gives no balanced argument on what he publishes, in fact often he gives no opinion at all. Jullian Assange may be trying to become a journalist and without doubt Wikileaks has scooped some stories which had they been obtained by a newspaper journalist it would have been award winning stuff but for the reasons above it is my personal opinion that Julian Assange is a irresponsible attention seeking blogger.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #54 August 21, 2012 Quote But it's still publishing. I publish on a blog too, it doesn't make me a journalist though.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #55 August 21, 2012 Quote I don't believe that Assange is a journalist for the following reasons. A) He fails to protect his sources. B) He is not selective in anyway in what he publishes. C) He doesn't present the information in a way in which the average person can understand and digest. D) He publishes with total disregard for the consequences. E) He is irresponsible and has published information that will get people killed. (eg: British Army Translators names and personal details in Iraq). F) He gives no balanced argument on what he publishes, in fact often he gives no opinion at all. Jullian Assange may be trying to become a journalist and without doubt Wikileaks has scooped some stories which had they been obtained by a newspaper journalist it would have been award winning stuff but for the reasons above it is my personal opinion that Julian Assange is a irresponsible attention seeking blogger. Good job, well stated.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #56 August 21, 2012 If Bradley is your only consideration, I say you don't know much about Mr. Assange. QuoteDon't damage computer systems you break into including crashing them; don't change the information in those systems except for altering logs to cover your tracks; and share information. Julian Assange Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #57 August 21, 2012 Using those criteria a photo journalist would fail to pass the test of "journalist" as well. Indeed, a photo journalist is the closest comparison to what he is. He came into information and without much editing sent it out on the "wires" to the major news networks. This information did in-fact paint a picture of American diplomacy in action. For better or worse the world has a little bit better understanding of how our government apparatus works after his "leak". Not only did the world gain some insight from these cables, there is also now an ongoing debate as to what journalism is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #58 August 21, 2012 QuoteNone of your comparisons are stealing other people's information. Information was shared with him and he shared it with other people, but as far as I know, the original possessors maintained access to it the entire time. So the information's value may have been reduced by virtue of increased supply, but I don't see where Assange "stole" it. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #59 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuoteNone of your comparisons are stealing other people's information. Information was shared with him and he shared it with other people, but as far as I know, the original possessors maintained access to it the entire time. So the information's value may have been reduced by virtue of increased supply, but I don't see where Assange "stole" it. Blues, Dave What, exactly, is the point of this post? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #60 August 22, 2012 He is a convicted hacker. Twenty some odd charges IIRC. That's stealing, isn't it? Or just B&E? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #61 August 22, 2012 QuoteHe is a convicted hacker. Twenty some odd charges IIRC. That's stealing, isn't it? Or just B&E? It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, having occurred 15 years before Wikileaks came into existence. He was fined $2100 AUS$ for those 25 convictions. The judge said "there is just no evidence that there was anything other than sort of intelligent inquisitiveness and the pleasure of being able to—what's the expression—surf through these various computers" (wiki) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #62 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteNone of your comparisons are stealing other people's information. Information was shared with him and he shared it with other people, but as far as I know, the original possessors maintained access to it the entire time. So the information's value may have been reduced by virtue of increased supply, but I don't see where Assange "stole" it. Blues, Dave What, exactly, is the point of this post? It was pretty obvious, wasn't it? He didn't steal any of the information published in wikileaks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #63 August 22, 2012 So you now admit he is in fact a criminal. Well that's a start I suppose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #64 August 22, 2012 Quote So you now admit he is in fact a criminal. Well that's a start I suppose. I'm not in denial about reality. I can see he played the hacker youth. I can also see that he didn't steal anything here and he is in fact a journalist, just one that isn't popular with Americans and other westerners, who seek revenge for the embarrassment of the released information. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #65 August 22, 2012 I am unaware of the desire for revenge by Americans. Care to enlighten me? A real shame the judge was ignorant enough to not understand the impact to global commerce that was caused by Mr. Assange's illegal activities and interruption of services when he did his crimes. The fine was a joke considering the cost of his hacking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #66 August 22, 2012 QuoteI am unaware of the desire for revenge by Americans. Care to enlighten me? please don't play dumb. We have thousands of posts in SC alone to confirm this. Quote A real shame the judge was ignorant enough to not understand the impact to global commerce that was caused by Mr. Assange's illegal activities and interruption of services when he did his crimes. The fine was a joke considering the cost of his hacking. global destruction? Nortel only claimed it cost them 100k. Not pennies, but I'll venture a chunk of that was mitigating their security tech debt that allowed the incursions. Either way, it's not a huge impact to global commerce, and again it has little bearing to the current topic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #67 August 22, 2012 Other than the claims by Assange and a handful of media hype stories, I have zero facts on the US wanting him for anything. Then add that Sweden has said they do not and will not extradite someone to any country with a death penalty.... I'm much more curious to see how in the hell they will get him out of Britain without him being arrested. Damn near impossible in fact. WTH are you referring to in re: "global destruction"? You DO realize the types of traffic Nortel carries don't you? Probably not actually... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #68 August 22, 2012 Quote Other than the claims by Assange and a handful of media hype stories, I have zero facts on the US wanting him for anything. Then add that Sweden has said they do not and will not extradite someone to any country with a death penalty.... Quote You're confusing an official US Govenment intent to prosecute (speculated, but mere conjecture) with the emotional rage of people like yourself who let it slant their objectivity on the topic. Quote I'm much more curious to see how in the hell they will get him out of Britain without him being arrested. Damn near impossible in fact. Hardly. If Ecuador can't put him in an embassy car and fly him out, there will be a diplomatic incident. The Brits will have to openly violate their sovereignty to arrest him. Doing so will only add to the suspicions of those who see this as retaliation from the Western nations. Quote WTH are you referring to in re: "global destruction"? You DO realize the types of traffic Nortel carries don't you? Probably not actually... I deal with security compliance as a major facet of my work. Yeah, I'm fully aware. Your grandiose language about how awful the impact was doesn't match up with the facts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #69 August 22, 2012 "If Ecuador can't put him in an embassy car and fly him out, " Can't happen. Unpossible. I love your "emotional rage" comment. I could honestly not possibly give a shit less on what happens to this idiot. His "I'm above the law" attitude is quite comical and entertaining though. My future surely looks brighter than his. Especially when you consider the amount of sunlight either of us could be exposed to. Or none. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #70 August 22, 2012 Sweden is our ally and friend. Ecudor is a banana republic who sides with our enemies. We'll do whats required and damn the consequences.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #71 August 22, 2012 QuoteSweden is our ally and friend. Ecudor is a banana republic who sides with our enemies. We'll do whats required and damn the consequences. I thought Sweden was neutral. And keep in mind that "Damning the Consequences" can backfire. If you treat others like that, don't be too surprised when others treat you in the same way."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #72 August 22, 2012 Maybe you don't watch the news much, they already do. Yes Sweden is neutral, we however are not.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #73 August 22, 2012 QuoteSweden is our ally and friend. Ecudor is a banana republic who sides with our enemies. We'll do whats required and damn the consequences. yeah, that's just the sort of attitude that showed in the private messages from the the embassies. But you probably should be thinking bigger picture here. Violating Ecuador's rights will likely result in a number of banana republics ejecting the UK ambassadors. It's not the first half of the 20th Century when England really mattered. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #74 August 23, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNone of your comparisons are stealing other people's information. Information was shared with him and he shared it with other people, but as far as I know, the original possessors maintained access to it the entire time. So the information's value may have been reduced by virtue of increased supply, but I don't see where Assange "stole" it. Blues, Dave What, exactly, is the point of this post? It was pretty obvious, wasn't it? He didn't steal any of the information published in wikileaks. My interpretation was that he was trying to draw a parallel to copyright infringement and arguments differentiating it from theft, which I think is asinine. Classification is not tantamount to a government copyright on the information, nor do the ramifications of the unauthorized sharing of either resemble one another. I honestly wasn't sure, so I asked. It's the correct conclusion that Assange never stole anything but a completely pear-shaped reasoning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #75 August 23, 2012 I would say that's a very accurate view on the embassy. So how do they get him out? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
