Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Dec 2010 12:16 UTC
Internet & Networking It looks like several companies are learning what happens when you mess with the internet - and they're learning it the hard way. Several major companies have been hit by the collective powers of Anonymous after 4chan launched several distributed denial-of-service attacks. What many have been predicting for a long time now has finally happened: an actual war between the powers that be on one side, and the internet on the other. Update: PayPal has admitted their WikiLeaks snub came after pressure from the US government, and Datacell, which takes care of payments to Wikileaks, is threatening to sue MasterCard over Wikileaks' account suspension. Update II: Visa.com is down due to the attack. Update III: PayPal has caved under the pressure, and will release the funds in the WikiLeaks account.
Thread beginning with comment 452657
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Hmmm
by LighthouseJ on Wed 8th Dec 2010 12:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmmm"
LighthouseJ
Member since:
2009-06-18

I'm wondering where the news about operating systems fits in to this one... oh well. mini-slashdot here we come.

It's interesting how reality is diverging from this alternate universe where Wikileaks apparently has a right to possess and disseminate others' information (aka invasion of privacy) that they want.
You can't wrap yourself in a warm cloak of freedom of information, which others that support Wikileaks, if it's not your information in the first place.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Hmmm
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 8th Dec 2010 12:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm wondering where the news about operating systems fits in to this one... oh well. mini-slashdot here we come.


You obviously haven't read OSNews for the past two years, so welcome back on board!

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Hmmm
by brewmastre on Wed 8th Dec 2010 13:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
brewmastre Member since:
2006-08-01

...It's interesting how reality is diverging from this alternate universe where Wikileaks apparently has a right to possess and disseminate others' information (aka invasion of privacy) that they want.


Umm, what? It's the United States government, they are supposed to represent us...they work for us. They were never created to grow bigger than us and keep things from us. I'm proud to be an American but that pride is fading. We (the US) cannot hold others to a standard that we ourselves will not live up to.

Reply Parent Score: 12

RE[4]: Hmmm
by LighthouseJ on Wed 8th Dec 2010 13:40 in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
LighthouseJ Member since:
2009-06-18

Umm, what? It's the United States government, they are supposed to represent us...they work for us. They were never created to grow bigger than us and keep things from us. I'm proud to be an American but that pride is fading. We (the US) cannot hold others to a standard that we ourselves will not live up to.


You missed the point of what I said. I was purely discussing the fact that information can only be "free'd" by the originating source. You can apply the same thing I said to doctor-patient or attourney-client privileges.

If someone stole your latest STD screening results and gave them to me, I hyped it up as something juicy to tell your friends and family, then released it on the ground of public health. Did I nobly free information or was I complicit in invading your privacy regardless of how important public health is?
Who gets to decide which is more valuable?

What happened is that someone took information (the "invading privacy" part) and leaked it, and people all around are saying "ohh, it's freedom of information! see how pure the motives are!". That's the divergent part from reality.

As far as what the US Government should do, and if they are working for the citizens, that's a different discussion.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Hmmm
by MollyC on Thu 9th Dec 2010 05:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

Would you be OK with me obtaining your name and social security number and releasing it on the internet? After all, that's simply government information, everyone has a right to see it, right?

Secondly, Assange admits to having a stolen copy of private emails of private corporations, and says he will release them as well. So the excuse that "All government information wants to be free" (which I don't buy, nor should you, even just based on the Social Security number example I gave above) doesn't even apply to Assange's operation. He'll release private info of private citizens if he feels like it.

Edited 2010-12-09 05:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm
by KickEmInDaBitchDitch on Wed 8th Dec 2010 21:24 in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
KickEmInDaBitchDitch Member since:
2010-12-08

" if it's not your information in the first place."

Well sir, I really hate to burst your bubble. But if you are an american citizen it IS "your information". Any information held by the United States government is the property of the people

As an american citizen, I have the right to take my information and distribute it anyway I see fit. The only retribution I should fear should be that of my fellow citizens, not that of the government

Too many people have forgotten our government are our employee's. Not the other way around

Edited 2010-12-08 21:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Hmmm
by vodoomoth on Thu 9th Dec 2010 10:48 in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

So according to this logic, US citizens (and consequently the world) should know the names of CIA agents, undercover FBI and police agents, where nuclear warheads are and how many of them there are, what weak points there are in the electricity distribution networks, etc. Why not make the nuclear codes available on simple request then?

Nobody sane would deny that Wikileaks revealing crimes or misdeeds is good. But, and this is what stalwart supporters like Thom and you don't seem to be able to understand, there's a line that should not be crossed. That line has been crossed with leaking that diplomatic communication... I still haven't seen how these cables revealed a crime. Still haven't seen how it benefits anyone. Someone, give me a concrete example.

Here's an instance of a useless cable (for those who read French, the original is at http://www.leprogres.fr/fr/france-monde/article/4247889/WikiLeaks-i...) that tells how the president was "transitively" chasing his 9 year-old son's rabbit. Translation is mine.

Louis showed up with a puppy and a rabbit in his arms. To shake the ambassador's hand, he put the rabbit on the ground and the puppy started chasing the rabbit, which led to the memorable view of the president running, bent, to catch the puppy, which was chasing the rabbit, while Louis was laughing out loud in the office".

Big crime by the US government there.


As an american citizen, I have the right to take my information and distribute it anyway I see fit. The only retribution I should fear should be that of my fellow citizens, not that of the government

That's not realistic. Juries composed of fellow citizens like you will deem you guilty in many cases. If it's not public knowledge, you have no right to release it unless it's yours. If it's public knowledge, why would you release it?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Hmmm
by cmack on Thu 9th Dec 2010 14:57 in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
cmack Member since:
2010-12-09

Uhmmm, no. Sorry you are wrong.

Information isn't owned by anyone. Regardless of what fascist governments attempt to claim.

Information can be:

known,
shared,
learned,
taught,
protected,
seized or captured,
and many other things....

anything but owned. Non-material, Non-physical object cannot be owned. Especially in the US where we hear everyday that we have a free market capitalist system.

Try again.

Information is power. Withholding information from the population is tyranny. That is all.

Reply Parent Score: 3