Hard News: Can we get an adult up in here?
30 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
A more appropriate simile would be holding the dom post responsible for what the sunday star times has published. Or really, holding a newspaper responsible for the myspace page of a 14 year old.
That’s a vivid comparison, but not really an accurate one. One Anonymous source frankly described the relationship with Wikileaks to Wired as a partnership, and an ongoing one
I’m quite open to there being public-interest and journalistic merit in this, but I just don't think taking a dump on the reception desk on the way out is a particularly productive thing to do.
-
I have subscribed to Stratfor for about 10 years as a way to get better information than you can from the media. I think the idea of Stratfor as a "secret CIA" is a joke (as much of a joke as Stratfor's website security apparently!!) It is just a source of good info for those of us wonkish people who like good info. Big deal.
Stratfor has some really interesting and insightful commentary, and I note that in the past I have seen RB site Stratfor in a few of his commentaries on Public Address, so therefore it can't be a total neocon, fascist, right-wing wankfest can it?
I have read all Friedman books and found his approach to strategic analysis as interesting as the actual results the approach produces.After reading him for a decade, it is clear to me that Friedman probably votes Democrat, believes that over the course of history Govt has had a central role in economic and technological development and for sure is no neocon, if anything he is an anti neocon. He tactfully but strongly criticized Bush’s invasion of Iraq and the neocon approach to world affairs in general, he is much more in the balance of power realist view. So as far as I can deduce Friedman and therefore Stratfor is no stereotypical far right wing “US supremacist, US take over the world” kind of guy. So I don’t know why all but the most extreme lefties would have a big problem with him or his views. Without a doubt he has some good sources, who may now be revealed, but so what? What is wrong with good sources and good info?
But regardless of Friedman’s views, this hack is a crime and as with any crime hopefully someone or some people will go down for it. Serves the bastards right.
-
James Butler, in reply to
The HBGary leak has easily been Anonymous’ best by a long shot.
Certainly their funniest.
-
Greg Dawson, in reply to
That’s a vivid comparison, but not really an accurate one. One Anonymous source frankly described the relationship with Wikileaks to Wired as a partnership, and an ongoing one
I know I'm being a stickler, but I think my comparison stands, given the extremely distributed way that Anonymous works.
To stretch a bad analogy too far - you're saying you've got this other kid who says he helps write the newspapers editorials, and you know he's probably going to the same school as the myspace kid. He might be the same kid.
That still doesn't make the newspaper responsible for the myspace page.
I agree with your second paragraph entirely, I just don't think it applies.
You can't hold wikileaks responsible for the doings of institutionally erratic anonymous kids, unless there is evidence that wikileaks *is* the same anonymous kids who are doing flagrantly douchey things with credit cards (possible, given Assange).
-
I think the issue is that hacktivism can be useful as long as it is arguably in the public interest and involves an ethical commitment to democratic and corporate accountability and transparency that forestalls potential and tangible harm to the life and safety of others. However, not all hacker activity has that ethical basis.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.