9 May 2009. A2 writes:
Who cares what you think about wikileaks? Totally incoherent talking points, btw, as usual.
8 May 2009
Cryptome was interviewed yesterday for an article on Wikileaks due out later this year. Points made:
1. Wikileaks deserves unfettered financial support by users of the Internet, if not by voluntary contributions then by a small cost for every commercial Internet transaction, handed over to Wikileaks with no strings attached, tax-free.
2. The heavy commercialization of the Internet needs to be countered by support for Wikileaks and other unfunded public interest web sites -- sites which receive no regular financial support from donors, board members or commercial sponsors, that is sites which are as toxicly anti-authoritarian and conventionally disreputable as Wikileaks, those which allegedly "go too far" in publishing secret and confidential information.
3. More sites are needed which go too far, and further, to enlarge the envelope for less courageous and overly-controlled, so-called reputable, ventures.
4. There needs to be a mulitude of Wikileaks-like web sites, not just one which remains vulnerable to takedown despite its impressive multiplicy of servers, mirrors and archives.
5. Wikileaks is vulnerable to takeover from inside, as does any anti-authoritarian venture which automatically generates efforts to co-opt it and to use it secretly for malign purposes by capitalizing on its reputation -- a standard tactic of spies and authoritarians.
6. No trustworthiness of a public interest venture survives for long -- each needs to be succeeded by new ventures unencumbered by longevity and reputation-protection of the long-lived.
7. The longer a public interest venture lasts, the less trustworthy it is.
8. The more it gains financial stability the less trustworthy it is.
9. The less that is known about who is operating and funding the venture, the less trustworthy it is.
10. The more it brags about and promotes its reputation, the less trustworthy it is.
11. The more public relations and press releases it uses, the less trustworthy it is.
12. Public interest ventures should not work in harmony with each other, but compete vigorously, slur one another, avoid mutual praise, raise doubts, falsely accuse -- this will make them more capable of resisting those who oppose them and manipulate with flattery.
13. Nobody is an authority on what a public interest venture should be or do or operate.
14. No public interest venture is to be trusted unless you operate it yourself -- then you know for sure what is dirty about it.
Background on Wikileaks and Cryptome: