This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Assange Arrested

dsfdsf
edited December 2010 in Politics
This just happened and reporters are scrambling to put together a story. British Law enforcement got him for the warrant from Sweden.
«134567

Comments

  • Way to kick the bee hive.
  • Don't worry everyone! The President of the United States is fine will pardon him or commute his jail sentence! Remember Scooter Libby? Outing spies is no problem, so anything Assange has done is small time compared to that.
  • Interestingly, the media is really spinning this like the arrest was somehow related to Wikileaks, and are being purposefully vague on what he's actually being arrested for.

    My prediction: he is found guilty in Sweden, pays a fine and/or has a short stint in jail, and then is set free for Wikileaks to continue unabated.
  • I'm wondering what the worst they could do to him is. Apart from a polonium cocktail.
  • Apart from a polonium cocktail.
    If he died under even the most remotely suspicious circumstances, the Internet rage machine would explode onto the scene like the world has never seen before. I would expect the rise of active, as opposed to passive, leak distribution systems arising rapidly, along with increasing acts of what would effectively be 'cyber" terrorism.
  • I'm wondering what the worst they could do to him is. Apart from a polonium cocktail.
    Doing anything nefarious would be monumentally stupid.
  • edited December 2010
    If he died under even the most remotely suspicious circumstances, the Internet rage machine would explode onto the scene like the world has never seen before. I would expect the rise of active, as opposed to passive, leak distribution systems arising rapidly, along with increasing acts of what would effectively be 'cyber" terrorism.
    Revenge of the Nerds.
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • It's really sketchy on the details. Some are saying he surrendered, some say the police caught him. Most I think will come of this is there's a trial and he's acquitted.
  • I was approving of what WikkiLeaks was doing until today when I heard on NPR that the latest series of releases divulged critical security weaknesses and key global infrastructure locations that are basically a hit-list for terrorists. I can understand wanting to leak the international gossip cables, but can we not give the terrorists a freakin' map and how-to for fucking us?
  • I think they have already gone too far. Not from a moral point of view, but from a "Did you really have to give nerds something to be legitimately indignant about?" way.
  • I was approving of what WikkiLeaks was doing until today when I heard on NPR that the latest series of releases divulged critical security weaknesses and key global infrastructure locations that are basically a hit-list for terrorists. I can understand wanting to leak the international gossip cables, but can we not give the terrorists a freakin' map and how-to for fucking us?
    Supposedly they already want to target these places so what's the big deal? And if they DO target them, why not just rebuild them and continue on? I think that's the greatest way to show terrorists that their methods are not the answer: ignore them. Rebuild whatever they blow up. Don't even acknowledge them. Once they understand violence won't get them anywhere maybe they'll try more reasonable methods.
  • Great idea, but how do you replace the people? If anything, maybe the government will haul ass to increase security at the mentioned places. But it is kind of hard to guard an under-water cable or pipeline...
  • Great idea, but how do you replace the people? If anything, maybe the government will haul ass to increase security at the mentioned places. But it is kind of hard to guard an under-water cable or pipeline...
    Those things get busted all the time. Currents snap em, subs run into em, fishing boats snag em on nets. There's boats on call 24/7 to go and fix underwater cables, and most of the people that would have reason to attack them probably don't have the capability to.
  • edited December 2010
    And if they DO target them, why not just rebuild them and continue on?
    You can't rebuild the people at those places.

    In any event, like Rym, I'm pretty sure Assange's arrest won't amount to anything.
    Post edited by TheWhaleShark on
  • edited December 2010
    I was approving of what WikkiLeaks was doing until today when I heard on NPR that the latest series of releases divulged critical security weaknesses and key global infrastructure locations that are basically a hit-list for terrorists. I can understand wanting to leak the international gossip cables, but can we not give the terrorists a freakin' map and how-to for fucking us?
    They already have maps. Everyone has maps. There are maps all over the place. Google serves up maps all the time. They are full of all kinds of Places and things which would be good targets for terrorists. If any terrorist wanted to take out any single building, piece of infrastructure, cable or anything else, he doesn't need a government list to help with that.

    What Wikileaks is doing here is what the government should be doing themselves. if I am living next to a possible security threat, or a target for possible terrorist attack, isn't it the responsibility of the government to tell me that? Should the first person to make it clear to me be a terrorist? No.
    Post edited by Luke Burrage on
  • I was approving of what WikkiLeaks was doing until today when I heard on NPR that the latest series of releases divulged critical security weaknesses and key global infrastructure locations that are basically a hit-list for terrorists. I can understand wanting to leak the international gossip cables, but can we not give the terrorists a freakin' map and how-to for fucking us?
    A map that isn't much more useful than what any determined person with Google and time to kill could create a reasonable analogue to.

    To be sure, Assange appears by all accounts to be a dick. But he was an inevitability, not an aberration. Closed systems with many people accessing them are effectively open systems if there is a will to see the information. I'm tired of a non-transparent government engaged in, for example, torture and rendition to foreign soil to avoid laws against said torture. I'm tired of undue secrecy and false security achieved by hoping that our enemies are too dim to use Google.

    Recall some years ago when amateur astronomers began tracking US spy satellites and publishing their orbits. The US government raised many of the same concerns they're raising now with Wikileaks, hoping that no one in Palestime or Saudi Arabia or China had ever heard of a telescope.
  • Interestingly, the media is really spinning this like the arrest was somehow related to Wikileaks, and are being purposefully vague on what he's actually being arrested for.

    My prediction: he is found guilty in Sweden, pays a fine and/or has a short stint in jail, and then is set free for Wikileaks to continue unabated.
    From what I've heard, Swedish jail is not very bad. Of course, I could be wrong.
  • What Wikileaks is doing here is what the government should be doing themselves. if I am living next to a possible security threat, or a target for possible terrorist attack, isn't it the responsibility of the government to tell me that? Should the first person to make it clear to me be a terrorist? No.
    This. More eyes means more security in the long run, as more people are more likely to notice smaller problems.

    What if the government asked engineers, scientists, technicians, and even just citizens, to share their best terrorism plans in order to then have a large body of possibilities for analysis and defense against? What if we openly warned people that "hey, this thing here is a likely target: keep your eyes open? We have millions of high-value targets. If we were open about all the ones which anyone with access to the Internet could find trivially, it's no more dangerous than if we were closed about them. A flood of information is just as useless as no information, but the latter is impossible to achieve in the modern world.
  • remember the guy who made a joke on twitter about bombing Robin Hood airport? There was I Am Spartacus moment where everyone else posted the same message.

    So, if Julian Assange is being arrested for having unprotected sex in Sweden, which can retroactively be called rape, or something like it, I think we should all admit to having unprotected sex. I have had unprotected sex. I once had unprotected sex in Sweden, although it was with a long-term girlfriend.
  • WikiLeaks will continue even if he is in jail. There are a lot more people working for it besides this guy.
  • edited December 2010
    What if the government asked engineers, scientists, technicians, and even just citizens, to share their best terrorism plans in order to then have a large body of possibilities for analysis and defense against? What if we openly warned people that "hey, this thing here is a likely target: keep your eyes open? We have millions of high-value targets. If we were open about all the ones which anyone with access to the Internet could find trivially, it's no more dangerous than if we were closed about them. A flood of information is just as useless as no information, but the latter is impossible to achieve in the modern world.
    How Gibsonian of you. But in essence, this would be crowd sourcing your security. I guess that the security consultancys that advise the government would bitch and moan, stopping the more secure option from happening and leaving us less secure because of security companies. Way to fuck us over guys.
    Post edited by ElJoe0 on
  • A flood of information is just as useless as no information
    Except that a flood of competing information, absent the ability to interpret that information, confuses otherwise reasonable people; as such, they wind up believing one piece of information over another for irrelevant and unconnected reasons.
    A map that isn't much more useful than what any determined person with Google and time to kill could create a reasonable analogue to.
    OK, let's say you wanted to attack Qatar. You're smart, have a lot of money, and you have access to the web. Go ahead and find information about Qatar for me. Tell me what sites are of importance to the US, their order of importance, the resources that make them important, defensive technologies at those sites, points of attack that can cripple the infrastructure, and any other information that seems pertinent. Post your sources.

    Difficulty: nothing that traces back to Wikileaks
    They are full of all kinds of Places and things which would be good targets for terrorists.
    There are lots of places on Google maps, but not all are equally effective targets for terrorist attacks. The reason Secret information is Secret is that it can contain interpretations of a mess of information.
    What Wikileaks is doing here is what the government should be doing themselves. if I am living next to a possible security threat, or a target for possible terrorist attack, isn't it the responsibility of the government to tell me that? Should the first person to make it clear to me be a terrorist? No.
    What makes you think the government didn't take measures to secure those places? I'm asking honestly here, because I haven't found any information one way or another in that regard.
  • I'm tired of a non-transparent government engaged in, for example, torture and rendition to foreign soil to avoid laws against said torture. I'm tired of undue secrecy and false security achieved by hoping that our enemies are too dim to use Google.
    You're tired as hell and you're not going to take it any more?
  • You're tired as hell and you're not going to take it any more?
    I have plenty of bread and the infinite circus that is the Internet.
  • So, if Julian Assange is being arrested for having unprotected sex in Sweden, which can retroactively be called rape, or something like it, I think we should all admit to having unprotected sex.
    It's not actually rape that he was charged with but "sex by surprise" and that amuses me to no end because I can't help but think 'Surprise Buttsecks!'.
  • I DON'T CARE IF THE WIKILEAKS GUY TOLD US ALL WHO SPIDER-MAN REALLY WAS, IF HE PUT HIS DINGER INTO A GIRL THAT DIDN'T WANT IT, END OF STORY.
    http://twitter.com/#!/JJONAHJAMESON/status/12162418666901504
  • OK, let's say you wanted to attack Qatar. You're smart, have a lot of money, and you have access to the web. Go ahead and find information about Qatar for me. Tell me what sites are of importance to the US, their order of importance, the resources that make them important, defensive technologies at those sites, points of attack that can cripple the infrastructure, and any other information that seems pertinent. Post your sources.

    Difficulty: nothing that traces back to Wikileaks
    Shit, I just wrote a post about how I visited Qatar this year, and by walking round and taking photos I could provide you with loads of that information first hand. Except I got mixed up with Oman. I have visited Qatar, but only the airport. I don't know anything about Qatar.
    What Wikileaks is doing here is what the government should be doing themselves. if I am living next to a possible security threat, or a target for possible terrorist attack, isn't it the responsibility of the government to tell me that? Should the first person to make it clear to me be a terrorist? No.
    What makes you think the government didn't take measures to secure those places? I'm asking honestly here, because I haven't found any information one way or another in that regard.
    I don't care what measures it takes to secure anything. My point is that if I lived next to or near something that could be a possible or likely target, I'd like to know about it. Not just for my own good either, because if I knew it was there, I'd keep an eye out for any suspicious behaviour myself! And not just if I live next to something, but if I am visiting or passing nearby.

    You know why it is so safe to fly? Because EVERYONE knows all the procedures, and is looking out for one another. You know why it is so safe to drive? Because there are loads of signs up saying "watch out!" You know why nobody sane smokes while filling their car up with petrol? Because it is common knowledge.

    I have a lot of faith in humanity. This might be misplaced, but it's there. I think the net good of telling everyone about any possible or likely terrorist target is a GOOD thing, enough to outweigh the slightest slightest chance that the information provided is something a wannabe terrorist can't find elsewhere.
  • I think the one thing people forget is that terrorists are MORONS. Even if you take away all the Wikileaks information, there was already enough information available to do huge damage with the greatest of ease. The fact that terrorists don't succeed more often shows that they are stupid. Therefore, putting more information out there, even if it's something straightforward like "Blow up the Brooklyn Bridge in 20 easy steps" will not put us in any more danger. Anyone who is smart enough to read it and succeed at executing it without being found out by intelligence and lawn enforcement agencies is smart enough to get a really good job. There is almost no crossover between smart people and evil/criminally insane people. That is what keeps us safe.

    The real "threat" is when the government goes against smart people. Notice how we don't kill people or do anything evil, though we do many illegal things. Also notice that when we do something we basically can't be stopped no matter what. No amount of security or secrecy can stop us. When it comes to breaking DRM, sharing files, getting weed, or any of the other illegal things we do, that we feel are not wrong, we can't be stopped.
  • lawn enforcement agencies
    hehehehe
Sign In or Register to comment.