Log in

No account? Create an account

Mon, Jan. 3rd, 2011, 01:28 pm
Why I Support Wikileaks

The choice is not for or against leaks, in any meaningful sense, though both sides are trying to make it so. Information leaks will happen, and they will happen more as technology advances. People do not understand the baroque and constantly shifting security implications of their actions, and they will be duped. National cybersecurity professionals are not immune.

The choice is between openness and poorly kept secrets. The choice is between everyone being able to reuse the data, or only the authorized and criminals being able to. The choice is between allowing average citizens to know what those working in their name are doing, or keeping them intentionally ignorant in the midst of ongoing information warfare between government, business, and criminal elites.

I prefer openness because its the only way I see that the little guy might not get chewed up and spat out without any recourse. Trusting without the capacity to verify is not governance, but the abdication of that fundamental responsibility. I prefer openness because I believe it's the best way to ensure that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Mon, Jan. 3rd, 2011 09:01 pm (UTC)


Mon, Jan. 3rd, 2011 10:41 pm (UTC)

I think you just summed up a great deal of the first amendment there. I believe that leaks are important. If it weren't for leaks, we wouldn't have found out about Watergate, amongst other things. The honor of our country is on the line, and we need the press to keep the government honest. Wikileaks is part of the press. Even if they haven't quite been recognized as such yet.

Thu, Jan. 6th, 2011 07:20 am (UTC)
(Anonymous): Yeah, but...

"The choice is between everyone being able to reuse the data, or only the authorized and criminals being able to."

I've bashed this around in my head and with friends for the last several weeks and simply can't come to terms with the above. This is not about "everyone". I had no issue when Wikileaks dropped Iraq and Afghanistan information about casualties, though this would not have been my choice. This was important for everyone to know.

However, the diplomatic cables are not about objective measurable facts and figures. They are a one-sided microscope into a multi-sided, multi-faceted process. They expose everything that diplomacy involves, including flattery, dissemination, double-talk, exaggeration, "white" lies, etc. The Wikileaks were not an expose on a diplomatic event or series of events crossing all borders... They were limited to the American efforts within the diplomacy sphere. There was no "everyone" to this leak. Just America and the sensitive information about which it must now seek damage control. This was not an expose of the process worthy of examination; just release of damaging information about 1 party to multilateral negotiations.

I support the concept but, like any powerful device, Wikileaks must be used in moderation around concepts that are measurable, neutral and indicative of an event from multiple sides.

Mon, Jan. 10th, 2011 05:18 am (UTC)
(Anonymous): Post Comment

Dynamic article.