Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
And my biggest bugaboo with conspiracy theorists... what if your favorite conspiracy theory is a conspiracy in itself? http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/12/could-israel-be-using-wikileaks-to-prepare-us-for-air-strike-against-iran/ I hate to stir the pot more, but it is a credible question as to whether WikiLeaks might have it's own agenda beyond journalism and journalistic freedom? I'm not promoting any specific (mis)use but even if we can somehow verify the relative authenticity of the docs being drizzled out to us, can we understand/verify the editorial decisions of which ones to open up when? And couldn't the selective release of truth be it's own manipulation? Is there a game theoretic model to describe this? Even me, a sort of radical Anarcho-Libertarian, am left a bit dazed and confused by the whole WikiLeaks thing. I'm very much in favor of the general principle of WikiLeaks, though I can't say I've assessed the implications carefully enough to be a blind-faith supporter. I hope there will be more discussion on the topic here. I'm very surprised there's been less discussion of WikiLeaks before today (let the mail flurries begin!) than there has been. I'm right there with Doug, feeling motivated to read most anything someone as big and pug-ugly as Big Brother tries to prohibit me from reading. On the other hand when I worked for the Government (through a DOE Contract to UC, then Bloody Bechtel), I understood that accessing such information on my US Gov't owned equipment was inappropriate and likely actionable. I also understood when I held various security clearances that I had agreed to protect anything declared to be classified from disclosure, so why try to obtain access to stuff for which I supposedly had no need to know, and certainly why would I corrupt my own computers, etc. with such information by downloading it to read? The whole structure of government secrets is questionable, but not trivial in any case, and I'm glad to be free of all that entanglement. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I give Amazon the right to decide they don't want to get embroiled in this. I might want to call them chickens but I don't think I get to decide for them what are good business practices. And in particular, what their legal and practical liabilities might be for hosting something as acutely controversial as this. In reading Ellsberg here, aspire to China's control of information seems hyperbolic. I do agree that WikiLeaks could provide an important resource for Whistleblowers, but comparing it to China's attempts seems overstated. A better boycott, if we are 100% in support of WikiLeaks would be to boycott anyone who *won't* host them... anyone in the business of web hosting who *won't* provide service to them dial up your ISP and tell them you want to mirror WikiLeaks on their infrastructure and then fire them if they say no. Amazon (and PayPal and ???) have tried to provide them service and the heat got too much. It will be various minor (and major?) heroes who will ultimately step up. Has WikiLeaks tried to get Google into the fray with Big Brother? I've not looked closely enough at WikiLeaks, their goals, methods, and what they've got of leaks to know how much I trust them or even how interested I am in their information. What is the level of experience with them amongst this group ? Reasoned ideas and opinions about just where the line is drawn (if anywhere) on freedom of information and the right of governments to try to keep secrets? Nick This would be like boycotting oxygen for me, but I think it should be considered. While I don't support the boycott (yet), it might be a good opportunity to look at the implications of becoming this dependent on Amazon (or Google or Microsoft or Apple or Yahoo or ...) and the implications of what you will do if they go weird on you. At 17.8 years old I'd had to contemplate the strong possibility that I would have to forsake (leave and not return to) the country where I'd been born and bred to avoid the ethical conundrums of signing up for selective service when I was not sure I could allow myself to be selected and then if selected, not sure I could serve, and then if I served, not sure I could serve wholeheartedly. Maybe we need to look as closely at our addictions to various corporations as many did at the Vietnam War (and other equally critical causes of yore). I'm not saying boycott, just evaluate and act accordingly? If I had a document disclosing how anyone with a HS grasp of biology could obtain, culture and dispense extra-deadly and virulent strains of the Ebola virus... maybe the entire DNA sequence of same... should I offer them to WikiLeaks? Should they accept and publish them? Should you read them? If I had a document outing every spy and informant for the US government (or the whole western world), what then? What would Valerie
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Steve Smith wrote: ... As usual, nicely thought out and articulated. For me its simple. I like WikiLeaks and the counter pressure they bring to bear. Not all corporations, politicians, militaries, labs, and so on are evil, but lately they've been throwing their power around way too much. And WL helps create a balance of power. It is absurd to argue that WL is putting solders and others at risk. They have been put there by their govt. But I doubt Amazon and other ISPs feel they can afford the mess they'd get into by offering WL an account. So what to do? My first approach would be Peer to Peer. That removes the debate from the large and powerful to the citizenry. Our first question then would be would I give 1% of my computer?. For me the answer is yes. OK then, how? Well, the easiest would be Torrents. I'd simply subscribe to a set of Torrents that were encrypted archives that the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) or WL would sponsor (RSS, name convention, etc). This would massively replicate the archives, making it pretty difficult to crush, yet not publish the content in the clear until judged appropriate by WL. We'd then need to create a P2P web tech of some sort, possibly built on top of torrents, to publish the material WL deems ready for the public. I'd also ask EFF to vet WL. Why? I have several friends associated with them, and although a bit on the fringe, I think they'd do a good job of calibrating WL, and possibly keeping them within bounds of sanity. If not EFF, then Lawrence Lessig. Let the people decide! -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Steve Smith wrote: ... As usual, nicely thought out and articulated. For me its simple. I like WikiLeaks and the counter pressure they bring to bear. Not all corporations, politicians, militaries, labs, and so on are evil, but lately they've been throwing their power around way too much. And WL helps create a balance of power. It is absurd to argue that WL is putting solders and others at risk. They have been put there by their govt. But I doubt Amazon and other ISPs feel they can afford the mess they'd get into by offering WL an account. So what to do? My first approach would be Peer to Peer. That removes the debate from the large and powerful to the citizenry. Our first question then would be would I give 1% of my computer?. For me the answer is yes. OK then, how? Well, the easiest would be Torrents. I'd simply subscribe to a set of Torrents that were encrypted archives that the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) or WL would sponsor (RSS, name convention, etc). This would massively replicate the archives, making it pretty difficult to crush, yet not publish the content in the clear until judged appropriate by WL. We'd then need to create a P2P web tech of some sort, possibly built on top of torrents, to publish the material WL deems ready for the public. I'd also ask EFF to vet WL. Why? I have several friends associated with them, and although a bit on the fringe, I think they'd do a good job of calibrating WL, and possibly keeping them within bounds of sanity. If not EFF, then Lawrence Lessig. Let the people decide! -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Well, before you mirror Wikifreaks, you may want to read this from BBC News: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11923766: 'A long list of key facilities around the world that the US describes as vital to its national security has been released by Wikileaks. In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. ... It inevitably prompts the question as to exactly what positive benefit Wikileaks was intending in releasing this document, he adds. Former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind condemned the move. This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal, Sir Malcolm said. This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing.' Cheers, Andy From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Roberts [d...@parrot-farm.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 10:32 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.netmailto:o...@backspaces.net wrote: On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Steve Smith wrote: ... As usual, nicely thought out and articulated. For me its simple. I like WikiLeaks and the counter pressure they bring to bear. Not all corporations, politicians, militaries, labs, and so on are evil, but lately they've been throwing their power around way too much. And WL helps create a balance of power. It is absurd to argue that WL is putting solders and others at risk. They have been put there by their govt. But I doubt Amazon and other ISPs feel they can afford the mess they'd get into by offering WL an account. So what to do? My first approach would be Peer to Peer. That removes the debate from the large and powerful to the citizenry. Our first question then would be would I give 1% of my computer?. For me the answer is yes. OK then, how? Well, the easiest would be Torrents. I'd simply subscribe to a set of Torrents that were encrypted archives that the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) or WL would sponsor (RSS, name convention, etc). This would massively replicate the archives, making it pretty difficult to crush, yet not publish the content in the clear until judged appropriate by WL. We'd then need to create a P2P web tech of some sort, possibly built on top of torrents, to publish the material WL deems ready for the public. I'd also ask EFF to vet WL. Why? I have several friends associated with them, and although a bit on the fringe, I think they'd do a good job of calibrating WL, and possibly keeping them within bounds of sanity. If not EFF, then Lawrence Lessig. Let the people decide! -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.govwrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
In a similar vein, where, exactly, is the huge, classified secret regarding the revelation that blowing up the Ningbo port in south-eastern China will have a large negative impact on global trade. Or that taking out an anti-snake venom factory in Australia will have a significant impact on our ability to treat snake bites? Even More Cynically, --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.govwrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
We should all be thankful that this exchange is occurring on FRIAM, rather than on Facebook. Else we would have endangered our job prospects. I'm not making this up: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/04/state-department-to-colum_n_792059.html?view=print Big Brother is watching. Be afraid, be very afraid. George Orwell was 26 years late, but he was dead-nuts on. --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: In a similar vein, where, exactly, is the huge, classified secret regarding the revelation that blowing up the Ningbo port in south-eastern China will have a large negative impact on global trade. Or that taking out an anti-snake venom factory in Australia will have a significant impact on our ability to treat snake bites? Even More Cynically, --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.govwrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James == FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
I propose a beer conversation at cowgirl or second street soon to discuss this. I hope the beer is not bugged. BTW: one concern I've had lately is the large number of folks converting to gmail. What a target for the Feds! And just how much resistance would Google put up? Can you say Zero? -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: We should all be thankful that this exchange is occurring on FRIAM, rather than on Facebook. Else we would have endangered our job prospects. I'm not making this up: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/04/state-department-to-colum_n_792059.html?view=print Big Brother is watching. Be afraid, be very afraid. George Orwell was 26 years late, but he was dead-nuts on. --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: In a similar vein, where, exactly, is the huge, classified secret regarding the revelation that blowing up the Ningbo port in south-eastern China will have a large negative impact on global trade. Or that taking out an anti-snake venom factory in Australia will have a significant impact on our ability to treat snake bites? Even More Cynically, --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.gov wrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James == FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Well, that's the issue, isn't it? The people in the government justify secrecy by one standard and then use it for whatever they can get away with, and you can get away with a lot if no one is ever allowed to see what you've done. So they claim strenuously that exposing secrets will endanger people, yet the exposed cables show them suppressing investigation of a mistaken extraordinary rendition which put an innocent person in the hands of torturers. http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.html http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.htmlBecause they decided that it was better that the German car salesman just take a few cattle prods in the nads for the freedom team rather than admit that they might have made criminal mistakes by kidnapping a citizen of an ally and whisking him off to Afganistan for information extraction. I watched Brazil again a month or two ago: it all starts with a swatted fly mutating someone's name into someone else's name, and it ends with tidying up all the loose ends that might interfere with the operation of an essential government service. We've been through multiple reviews of the abuses of secrecy in this country, and the net result is that the amount of stuff which is kept from public eyes just keeps on growing. Got a check or balance on that trend? -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.govwrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Why worry about gmail? Worry about the NSA backdoor that Intel added to the x86 microcode years ago, until you get tired, then go back to your regularly scheduled activities. -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: BTW: one concern I've had lately is the large number of folks converting to gmail. What a target for the Feds! And just how much resistance would Google put up? Can you say Zero? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
I can't help but notice that the majority of our hard core FRIAM pontificators have remained silent on this one. I wonder why: Could it be that they're not not interested? The topic is not abstract enough? Afraid that Big Brother will hear them? Weren't aware of WikiLeaks? Over on another one of my social networks I at least had one person regurgitate the Government Spin Attempt of so many people were put in danger by having this information released, but the good news is that it was immediately pointed out that the claim that the release of this information has put people in danger has been debunked several times. The US government knew the leak occurred several months before WikiLeaks published the information. There was time to get personnel out of harm's way. It could be said that the release itself (by Bradley Manning or whoever) did potentially put people in danger, but WikiLeaks is not to blame for that. FRIAM's general majority silence on this is curious... --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: Well, that's the issue, isn't it? The people in the government justify secrecy by one standard and then use it for whatever they can get away with, and you can get away with a lot if no one is ever allowed to see what you've done. So they claim strenuously that exposing secrets will endanger people, yet the exposed cables show them suppressing investigation of a mistaken extraordinary rendition which put an innocent person in the hands of torturers. http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.html http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.htmlBecause they decided that it was better that the German car salesman just take a few cattle prods in the nads for the freedom team rather than admit that they might have made criminal mistakes by kidnapping a citizen of an ally and whisking him off to Afganistan for information extraction. I watched Brazil again a month or two ago: it all starts with a swatted fly mutating someone's name into someone else's name, and it ends with tidying up all the loose ends that might interfere with the operation of an essential government service. We've been through multiple reviews of the abuses of secrecy in this country, and the net result is that the amount of stuff which is kept from public eyes just keeps on growing. Got a check or balance on that trend? -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.govwrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
In my opinion, based on personal observation, the political and economic system of the United States is quickly declining and darkly dystrophic as has been the case with all empires. The information provided by WikiLeaks, although not at all surprising, and the reaction of the government to WikiLeaks, only confirms my belief. WikiLeaks is providing a needed view into the mindset of those who govern and the system they represent. Sometimes it seems that humanity is self-organizing for self destruction. Long live WikiLeaks! cheers(?) Paul -Original Message- From: Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com Sent: Mon, Dec 6, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. I can't help but notice that the majority of our hard core FRIAM pontificators have remained silent on this one. I wonder why: Could it be that they're not not interested? The topic is not abstract enough? Afraid that Big Brother will hear them? Weren't aware of WikiLeaks? Over on another one of my social networks I at least had one person regurgitate the Government Spin Attempt of so many people were put in danger by having this information released, but the good news is that it was immediately pointed out that the claim that the release of this information has put people in danger has been debunked several times. The US government knew the leak occurred several months before WikiLeaks published the information. There was time to get personnel out of harm's way. It could be said that the release itself (by Bradley Manning or whoever) did potentially put people in danger, but WikiLeaks is not to blame for that. FRIAM's general majority silence on this is curious... --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: Well, that's the issue, isn't it? The people in the government justify secrecy by one standard and then use it for whatever they can get away with, and you can get away with a lot if no one is ever allowed to see what you've done. So they claim strenuously that exposing secrets will endanger people, yet the exposed cables show them suppressing investigation of a mistaken extraordinary rendition which put an innocent person in the hands of torturers. http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.html Because they decided that it was better that the German car salesman just take a few cattle prods in the nads for the freedom team rather than admit that they might have made criminal mistakes by kidnapping a citizen of an ally and whisking him off to Afganistan for information extraction. I watched Brazil again a month or two ago: it all starts with a swatted fly mutating someone's name into someone else's name, and it ends with tidying up all the loose ends that might interfere with the operation of an essential government service. We've been through multiple reviews of the abuses of secrecy in this country, and the net result is that the amount of stuff which is kept from public eyes just keeps on growing. Got a check or balance on that trend? -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.gov wrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
^Like On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: I like the idea that wikileaks is a CIA plot. It screeches the mind to a halt. You can’t even trust your distrust anymore. Nick *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul Paryski *Sent:* Monday, December 06, 2010 1:10 PM *To:* friam@redfish.com *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. In my opinion, based on personal observation, the political and economic system of the United States is quickly declining and darkly dystrophic as has been the case with all empires. The information provided by WikiLeaks, although not at all surprising, and the reaction of the government to WikiLeaks, only confirms my belief. WikiLeaks is providing a needed view into the mindset of those who govern and the system they represent. Sometimes it seems that humanity is self-organizing for self destruction. Long live WikiLeaks! cheers(?) Paul -Original Message- From: Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com Sent: Mon, Dec 6, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. I can't help but notice that the majority of our hard core FRIAM pontificators have remained silent on this one. I wonder why: Could it be that they're not not interested? The topic is not abstract enough? Afraid that Big Brother will hear them? Weren't aware of WikiLeaks? Over on another one of my social networks I at least had one person regurgitate the Government Spin Attempt of so many people were put in danger by having this information released, but the good news is that it was immediately pointed out that the claim that the release of this information has put people in danger has been debunked several times. The US government knew the leak occurred several months before WikiLeaks published the information. There was time to get personnel out of harm's way. It could be said that the release itself (by Bradley Manning or whoever) did potentially put people in danger, but WikiLeaks is not to blame for that. FRIAM's general majority silence on this is curious... --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: Well, that's the issue, isn't it? The people in the government justify secrecy by one standard and then use it for whatever they can get away with, and you can get away with a lot if no one is ever allowed to see what you've done. So they claim strenuously that exposing secrets will endanger people, yet the exposed cables show them suppressing investigation of a mistaken extraordinary rendition which put an innocent person in the hands of torturers. http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.html Because they decided that it was better that the German car salesman just take a few cattle prods in the nads for the freedom team rather than admit that they might have made criminal mistakes by kidnapping a citizen of an ally and whisking him off to Afganistan for information extraction. I watched Brazil again a month or two ago: it all starts with a swatted fly mutating someone's name into someone else's name, and it ends with tidying up all the loose ends that might interfere with the operation of an essential government service. We've been through multiple reviews of the abuses of secrecy in this country, and the net result is that the amount of stuff which is kept from public eyes just keeps on growing. Got a check or balance on that trend? -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.gov wrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
There are those that say the leaks about the Saudis and other Arab states calling for military intervention in Iran were deliberate. But this being said, it is highly unlikely that WikiLeaks will change any policies. thanks, Paul -Original Message- From: Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' friam@redfish.com Sent: Mon, Dec 6, 2010 1:18 pm Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. I like the idea that wikileaks is a CIA plot. It screeches the mind to a halt. You can’t even trust your distrust anymore. Nick From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Paul Paryski Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 1:10 PM To: friam@redfish.com Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. In my opinion, based on personal observation, the political and economic system of the United States is quickly declining and darkly dystrophic as has been the case with all empires. The information provided by WikiLeaks, although not at all surprising, and the reaction of the government to WikiLeaks, only confirms my belief. WikiLeaks is providing a needed view into the mindset of those who govern and the system they represent. Sometimes it seems that humanity is self-organizing for self destruction. Long live WikiLeaks! cheers(?) Paul -Original Message- From: Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com Sent: Mon, Dec 6, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. I can't help but notice that the majority of our hard core FRIAM pontificators have remained silent on this one. I wonder why: Could it be that they're not not interested? The topic is not abstract enough? Afraid that Big Brother will hear them? Weren't aware of WikiLeaks? Over on another one of my social networks I at least had one person regurgitate the Government Spin Attempt of so many people were put in danger by having this information released, but the good news is that it was immediately pointed out that the claim that the release of this information has put people in danger has been debunked several times. The US government knew the leak occurred several months before WikiLeaks published the information. There was time to get personnel out of harm's way. It could be said that the release itself (by Bradley Manning or whoever) did potentially put people in danger, but WikiLeaks is not to blame for that. FRIAM's general majority silence on this is curious... --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: Well, that's the issue, isn't it? The people in the government justify secrecy by one standard and then use it for whatever they can get away with, and you can get away with a lot if no one is ever allowed to see what you've done. So they claim strenuously that exposing secrets will endanger people, yet the exposed cables show them suppressing investigation of a mistaken extraordinary rendition which put an innocent person in the hands of torturers. http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/01/wikileaks-and-the-el.html Because they decided that it was better that the German car salesman just take a few cattle prods in the nads for the freedom team rather than admit that they might have made criminal mistakes by kidnapping a citizen of an ally and whisking him off to Afganistan for information extraction. I watched Brazil again a month or two ago: it all starts with a swatted fly mutating someone's name into someone else's name, and it ends with tidying up all the loose ends that might interfere with the operation of an essential government service. We've been through multiple reviews of the abuses of secrecy in this country, and the net result is that the amount of stuff which is kept from public eyes just keeps on growing. Got a check or balance on that trend? -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Steiner gregortr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Scholand, Andrew J ajsc...@sandia.gov wrote: In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Well, considering the tendency to slap national security and classified labels on everything, I'd expect the list also includes a fair number of vending machine suppliers and escort services. Cynically, ~~James FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
The abundance of online discussions about WikiLeaks, has provoked me to recall a conversation I had with an individual at an 'Internetworking' meeting at the Carnegie Inst. in DC, in 1992.We met for the first time, and quickly shared our interest in 'information warfare'. Though he could not tell me what he did for a living, it was clear that he was a civilian involved with military intelligence (DIA). I mentioned recent past (Glasnost / Perestroika) conversations I'd had with other 'intelligence' agents, including former Soviet officials. Bob told me that US/UK and the USSR secrecy practices of the Cold War, had resulted in two to three generations of secrecy, deception and obfuscation, which had cumulatively permeated all sectors of the intelligence community; to the point that internally, agencies could no longer function effectively. We were all lying to ourselves , as well as to our enemies. A new strategy was determined by all. We could no longer keep secrets from our enemies, so we would overwhelm them with 'information overload'. Too much raw and unprocessed (un-vetted) information would mire our enemies in confusion and uncertainty. In a networked local-global society, this would also permeate throughout our own society; a top-down, best-practice for controlling large, diverse, contentious and 'well informed' populations; the unruly democratic mob. A few months earlier (pre-web 1991), immediately following the brief Gulf War, through a source at the Pentagon, I received and then released video to ABC News of recent, secret 'friendly fire' incidents that occurred during that conflict. It went viral. I'll save my story for another time, about the redacted web-art project: www.nationalsecuritytesting.info RL --- Richard Lowenberg P. O. Box 8001, Santa Fe, NM 87504 505-989-9110 off.; 505-603-5200 cell --- 1st-Mile Institute, a program of Santa Fe Complex New Mexico 'Broadband for All' Initiative www.1st-mile.com r...@1st-mile.com --- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Ah! The fatal attraction of paranoia. The illusion that ANYBODY gives a ff what I do. N From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:48 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. Why worry about gmail? Worry about the NSA backdoor that Intel added to the x86 microcode years ago, until you get tired, then go back to your regularly scheduled activities. -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: BTW: one concern I've had lately is the large number of folks converting to gmail. What a target for the Feds! And just how much resistance would Google put up? Can you say Zero? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Just for the interest, I thought I'd look into how I might do this. Technically, it'd be very easy - just create an FTP account on my hosted webservice, and set up the extra domain. The problem is that they would get me by the terms of service: Personal accounts are to be used by the primary owner only. Personal account holders are not permitted resell, store or give away web-hosting services of their web site to other parties. Web hosting services are defined as allowing a separate, third party to host content on the owner's web site. Exceptions to this include ad banners, classified ads, and personal ads. Unlimited-Space.com reserves the right to refuse service and /or access to its servers to anyone. I can see how mirroring Wikileaks could be considered giving away web-hosting service, which is against the ToS. Secondly, they could also argue that Unlimited-Space.com do not allow any of the following content to be stored on its servers: Illegal Material - This includes copyrighted works, commercial audio, video, or music files, and any material in violation of any Federal, State or Local regulation. All the Australian government would need to do is classify the wikileak data as illegal, or just invoke copyright on the cables issued by Australian embassies. So alas, I would fold at the first whiff of a fight. But I'm glad to see a lot of other sites offering support already. Maybe torrenting might work better? On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 10:32:16AM -0700, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 hpco...@hpcoders.com.au Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Ah, the fatal attraction of privilege: the illusion that as long as NOBODY gives a ff what *you* do, everything is OK. That's not directed at you, Nick, but I couldn't resist the parallel structure. ~~J On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Ah! The fatal attraction of paranoia. The illusion that ANYBODY gives a ff what I do. N *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Roger Critchlow *Sent:* Monday, December 06, 2010 11:48 AM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. Why worry about gmail? Worry about the NSA backdoor that Intel added to the x86 microcode years ago, until you get tired, then go back to your regularly scheduled activities. -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: BTW: one concern I've had lately is the large number of folks converting to gmail. What a target for the Feds! And just how much resistance would Google put up? Can you say Zero? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
G Well, I guess, both are illusions. n From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of James Steiner Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 5:30 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. Ah, the fatal attraction of privilege: the illusion that as long as NOBODY gives a ff what *you* do, everything is OK. That's not directed at you, Nick, but I couldn't resist the parallel structure. ~~J On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Ah! The fatal attraction of paranoia. The illusion that ANYBODY gives a ff what I do. N From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:48 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. Why worry about gmail? Worry about the NSA backdoor that Intel added to the x86 microcode years ago, until you get tired, then go back to your regularly scheduled activities. -- rec -- On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: BTW: one concern I've had lately is the large number of folks converting to gmail. What a target for the Feds! And just how much resistance would Google put up? Can you say Zero? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
The Berkman Center for Internet Society is going to have Larry Lessig and Jonathan Zittrain moderate a discussion .. see more here: http://goo.gl/VFoV9 Feel free to add a topic to the discussion via the url above .. either as a comment or on their twitter account listed there. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Doug: I've asked the Berkman Center to include a risk assessment for our helping out via the mirroring stunt you posted. Note the mirror list is growing fast: Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 729 sites (updated 2010-12-06 22:32 GMT) -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug Begin forwarded message: Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. The Berkman Center for Internet Society is going to have Larry Lessig and Jonathan Zittrain moderate a discussion .. see more here: http://goo.gl/VFoV9 Feel free to add a topic to the discussion via the url above .. either as a comment or on their twitter account listed there. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
That's cool, Owen. The US continues to strive, with some success, to make itself out as a nation of idiots/cowards/and/or sheep in the eyes of the rest of the world. Thankfully, there are enough active mirrors to essentially guarantee that the WikiLeaks material won't be lost. --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: Doug: I've asked the Berkman Center to include a risk assessment for our helping out via the mirroring stunt you posted. Note the mirror list is growing fast: Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 729 sites (updated 2010-12-06 22:32 GMT) -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug Begin forwarded message: Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. The Berkman Center for Internet Society is going to have Larry Lessig and Jonathan Zittrain moderate a discussion .. see more here: http://goo.gl/VFoV9 Feel free to add a topic to the discussion via the url above .. either as a comment or on their twitter account listed there. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
This is an interesting and—IMHO—nicely balanced piece. It's all shades of grey, man -- R http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/12/wikileaks-and-the-long-haul/ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
On 12/6/10 6:21 PM, Owen Densmore wrote: Doug: I've asked the Berkman Center to include a risk assessment for our helping out via the mirroring stunt you posted. Note the mirror list is growing fast: Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 729 sites (updated 2010-12-06 22:32 GMT) I'm surprised it is only growing linear, not geometric! Do we have a model for that? -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug Begin forwarded message: Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. The Berkman Center for Internet Society is going to have Larry Lessig and Jonathan Zittrain moderate a discussion .. see more here: http://goo.gl/VFoV9 Feel free to add a topic to the discussion via the url above .. either as a comment or on their twitter account listed there. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 09:16:03PM -0700, Steve Smith wrote: On 12/6/10 6:21 PM, Owen Densmore wrote: Doug: I've asked the Berkman Center to include a risk assessment for our helping out via the mirroring stunt you posted. Note the mirror list is growing fast: Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 729 sites (updated 2010-12-06 22:32 GMT) I'm surprised it is only growing linear, not geometric! Do we have a model for that? -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: Only two data points. The only model is the linear one :). -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 hpco...@hpcoders.com.au Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Russell - I forgot to mention... I've been using Collecta to monitor the real-time traffic since about 9PM GMT-7 on the topic and have a dozen or so data points which are roughly linear... I suppose I might have been the only one tracking at that level... And when I say linear, I often suspect all natural phenomena of sufficient complexity are roughly Sigmoidal... so, the question is really why we aren't still on the (apparently) exponential or geometric portion... a scaling question more likely. - Steve On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 09:16:03PM -0700, Steve Smith wrote: On 12/6/10 6:21 PM, Owen Densmore wrote: Doug: I've asked the Berkman Center to include a risk assessment for our helping out via the mirroring stunt you posted. Note the mirror list is growing fast: Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 729 sites (updated 2010-12-06 22:32 GMT) I'm surprised it is only growing linear, not geometric! Do we have a model for that? -- Owen On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: Only two data points. The only model is the linear one :). FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
On Dec 6, 2010, at 7:18 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: This is an interesting and—IMHO—nicely balanced piece. It's all shades of grey, man -- R http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/12/wikileaks-and-the-long-haul/ Hard to argue with Clay's point that a balance of power, with clear and just laws, define the boundary of freedom of information. But note how he is also clear that we have no such balance, nor reasonable laws. This is the age of populism, from the Tea Party to Libertarianism, to now a free and open (and responsible) internet. I am interested in hearing nuanced discussions. But no longer amongst politicians. Or power brokers and industries. They have lost their place and squandered their right to lead. Its us now. This includes Lessig and Shirky and others of their ilk like Kevin Kelley and Tim O'Reilly; sites like the Edge and TED; organizations like EFF, Berkman and the Creative Commons. And I hope ourselves. But for now, I want to, much like Lessig, understand what our digital rights are, and what they should be. For the latter, we need to start doing things such as building our own networks and services. Like wikileaks mirrors. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Owen n all, For me, in the age of Fox news and media consolidation, the benefit of the doubt goes to Wikileaks. Oh, and, by the way: As of Obama's announcement today, I am trolling for a third party. Any suggestions? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:55 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. On Dec 6, 2010, at 7:18 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: This is an interesting and-IMHO-nicely balanced piece. It's all shades of grey, man -- R http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/12/wikileaks-and-the-long-haul/ Hard to argue with Clay's point that a balance of power, with clear and just laws, define the boundary of freedom of information. But note how he is also clear that we have no such balance, nor reasonable laws. This is the age of populism, from the Tea Party to Libertarianism, to now a free and open (and responsible) internet. I am interested in hearing nuanced discussions. But no longer amongst politicians. Or power brokers and industries. They have lost their place and squandered their right to lead. Its us now. This includes Lessig and Shirky and others of their ilk like Kevin Kelley and Tim O'Reilly; sites like the Edge and TED; organizations like EFF, Berkman and the Creative Commons. And I hope ourselves. But for now, I want to, much like Lessig, understand what our digital rights are, and what they should be. For the latter, we need to start doing things such as building our own networks and services. Like wikileaks mirrors. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Independent. On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Owen n all, For me, in the age of Fox news and media consolidation, the benefit of the doubt goes to Wikileaks. Oh, and, by the way: As of Obama's announcement today, I am trolling for a third party. Any suggestions? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:55 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. On Dec 6, 2010, at 7:18 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: This is an interesting and-IMHO-nicely balanced piece. It's all shades of grey, man -- R http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/12/wikileaks-and-the-long-haul/ Hard to argue with Clay's point that a balance of power, with clear and just laws, define the boundary of freedom of information. But note how he is also clear that we have no such balance, nor reasonable laws. This is the age of populism, from the Tea Party to Libertarianism, to now a free and open (and responsible) internet. I am interested in hearing nuanced discussions. But no longer amongst politicians. Or power brokers and industries. They have lost their place and squandered their right to lead. Its us now. This includes Lessig and Shirky and others of their ilk like Kevin Kelley and Tim O'Reilly; sites like the Edge and TED; organizations like EFF, Berkman and the Creative Commons. And I hope ourselves. But for now, I want to, much like Lessig, understand what our digital rights are, and what they should be. For the latter, we need to start doing things such as building our own networks and services. Like wikileaks mirrors. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
[FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Even me, a sort of radical Anarcho-Libertarian, am left a bit dazed and confused by the whole WikiLeaks thing. I'm very much in favor of the general principle of WikiLeaks, though I can't say I've assessed the implications carefully enough to be a blind-faith supporter. I hope there will be more discussion on the topic here. I'm very surprised there's been less discussion of WikiLeaks before today (let the mail flurries begin!) than there has been. I'm right there with Doug, feeling motivated to read most anything someone as big and pug-ugly as Big Brother tries to prohibit me from reading. On the other hand when I worked for the Government (through a DOE Contract to UC, then Bloody Bechtel), I understood that accessing such information on my US Gov't owned equipment was inappropriate and likely actionable. I also understood when I held various security clearances that I had agreed to protect anything declared to be classified from disclosure, so why try to obtain access to stuff for which I supposedly had no need to know, and certainly why would I corrupt my own computers, etc. with such information by downloading it to read? The whole structure of government secrets is questionable, but not trivial in any case, and I'm glad to be free of all that entanglement. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I give Amazon the right to decide they don't want to get embroiled in this. I might want to call them chickens but I don't think I get to decide for them what are good business practices. And in particular, what their legal and practical liabilities might be for hosting something as acutely controversial as this. In reading Ellsberg here, aspire to China's control of information seems hyperbolic. I do agree that WikiLeaks could provide an important resource for Whistleblowers, but comparing it to China's attempts seems overstated. A better boycott, if we are 100% in support of WikiLeaks would be to boycott anyone who *won't* host them... anyone in the business of web hosting who *won't* provide service to them dial up your ISP and tell them you want to mirror WikiLeaks on their infrastructure and then fire them if they say no. Amazon (and PayPal and ???) have tried to provide them service and the heat got too much. It will be various minor (and major?) heroes who will ultimately step up. Has WikiLeaks tried to get Google into the fray with Big Brother? I've not looked closely enough at WikiLeaks, their goals, methods, and what they've got of leaks to know how much I trust them or even how interested I am in their information. What is the level of experience with them amongst this group ? Reasoned ideas and opinions about just where the line is drawn (if anywhere) on freedom of information and the right of governments to try to keep secrets? Nick This would be like boycotting oxygen for me, but I think it should be considered. While I don't support the boycott (yet), it might be a good opportunity to look at the implications of becoming this dependent on Amazon (or Google or Microsoft or Apple or Yahoo or ...) and the implications of what you will do if they go weird on you. At 17.8 years old I'd had to contemplate the strong possibility that I would have to forsake (leave and not return to) the country where I'd been born and bred to avoid the ethical conundrums of signing up for selective service when I was not sure I could allow myself to be selected and then if selected, not sure I could serve, and then if I served, not sure I could serve wholeheartedly. Maybe we need to look as closely at our addictions to various corporations as many did at the Vietnam War (and other equally critical causes of yore). I'm not saying boycott, just evaluate and act accordingly? If I had a document disclosing how anyone with a HS grasp of biology could obtain, culture and dispense extra-deadly and virulent strains of the Ebola virus... maybe the entire DNA sequence of same... should I offer them to WikiLeaks? Should they accept and publish them? Should you read them? If I had a document outing every spy and informant for the US government (or the whole western world), what then? What would Valerie Plame (lives here in Santa Fe, pushes high end real-estate I think) say? I like the idea of no official state secrets, but It is a tangled web, and it is hard to unstir the cream once poured into the Earl Grey... Maybe with elements like WikiLeaks out there, maybe just beyond the reach of any Government (or multinational?) the dependence on state secrets and the inherent abuse of power they support will wane? Carry on! - Steve Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon Posted By _Daniel Ellsberg_ On December 2, 2010 @ 10:23 pm In _News_ | _394 Comments http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2010/12/02/daniel-ellsberg-says-boycott-amazon/print/#comments_controls_ *Open letter to Amazon.com Customer Service:* December 2, 2010 I'm
[FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc.
Even me, a sort of radical Anarcho-Libertarian, am left a bit dazed and confused by the whole WikiLeaks thing. I'm very much in favor of the general principle of WikiLeaks, though I can't say I've assessed the implications carefully enough to be a blind-faith supporter. I hope there will be more discussion on the topic here. I'm very surprised there's been less discussion of WikiLeaks before today (let the mail flurries begin!) than there has been. I'm right there with Doug, feeling motivated to read most anything someone as big and pug-ugly as Big Brother tries to prohibit me from reading. On the other hand when I worked for the Government (through a DOE Contract to UC, then Bloody Bechtel), I understood that accessing such information on my US Gov't owned equipment was inappropriate and likely actionable. I also understood when I held various security clearances that I had agreed to protect anything declared to be classified from disclosure, so why try to obtain access to stuff for which I supposedly had no need to know, and certainly why would I corrupt my own computers, etc. with such information by downloading it to read? The whole structure of government secrets is questionable, but not trivial in any case, and I'm glad to be free of all that entanglement. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I give Amazon the right to decide they don't want to get embroiled in this. I might want to call them chickens but I don't think I get to decide for them what are good business practices. And in particular, what their legal and practical liabilities might be for hosting something as acutely controversial as this. In reading Ellsberg here, aspire to China's control of information seems hyperbolic. I do agree that WikiLeaks could provide an important resource for Whistleblowers, but comparing it to China's attempts seems overstated. A better boycott, if we are 100% in support of WikiLeaks would be to boycott anyone who *won't* host them... anyone in the business of web hosting who *won't* provide service to them dial up your ISP and tell them you want to mirror WikiLeaks on their infrastructure and then fire them if they say no. Amazon (and PayPal and ???) have tried to provide them service and the heat got too much. It will be various minor (and major?) heroes who will ultimately step up. Has WikiLeaks tried to get Google into the fray with Big Brother? I've not looked closely enough at WikiLeaks, their goals, methods, and what they've got of leaks to know how much I trust them or even how interested I am in their information. What is the level of experience with them amongst this group ? Reasoned ideas and opinions about just where the line is drawn (if anywhere) on freedom of information and the right of governments to try to keep secrets? Nick This would be like boycotting oxygen for me, but I think it should be considered. While I don't support the boycott (yet), it might be a good opportunity to look at the implications of becoming this dependent on Amazon (or Google or Microsoft or Apple or Yahoo or ...) and the implications of what you will do if they go weird on you. At 17.8 years old I'd had to contemplate the strong possibility that I would have to forsake (leave and not return to) the country where I'd been born and bred to avoid the ethical conundrums of signing up for selective service when I was not sure I could allow myself to be selected and then if selected, not sure I could serve, and then if I served, not sure I could serve wholeheartedly. Maybe we need to look as closely at our addictions to various corporations as many did at the Vietnam War (and other equally critical causes of yore). I'm not saying boycott, just evaluate and act accordingly? If I had a document disclosing how anyone with a HS grasp of biology could obtain, culture and dispense extra-deadly and virulent strains of the Ebola virus... maybe the entire DNA sequence of same... should I offer them to WikiLeaks? Should they accept and publish them? Should you read them? If I had a document outing every spy and informant for the US government (or the whole western world), what then? What would Valerie Plame (lives here in Santa Fe, pushes high end real-estate I think) say? I like the idea of no official state secrets, but It is a tangled web, and it is hard to unstir the cream once poured into the Earl Grey... Maybe with elements like WikiLeaks out there, maybe just beyond the reach of any Government (or multinational?) the dependence on state secrets and the inherent abuse of power they support will wane? Carry on! - Steve Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon Posted By _Daniel Ellsberg_ On December 2, 2010 @ 10:23 pm In _News_ | _394 Comments http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2010/12/02/daniel-ellsberg-says-boycott-amazon/print/#comments_controls_ *Open letter to Amazon.com Customer Service:* December 2, 2010 I'm
