Slashdot Mirror

I think that Julian Assange talked about doing this in an interview I read. It really does make a lot of sense. You can make sure you have the right document and that it has not been altered.
Ha! I found it! Interview with Assange and Eric Schmidt.
http://techpresident.com/news/23773/googles-eric-schmidt-and-wikileaks-julian-assange-get-one-anothers-jokes
"Schmidt asks Assange what technologies he's looking out for to make it easier for an anonymous sender to reach out to a dubious recipient. He responds:
        The most important one is naming things properly. If we are able to name some... a video file or a piece of text in a way that is intrinsically coupled to the information there, so that there is no ambiguity-- a hash is an example of this--but then there's variations, maybe you want one that human beings can actually remember. Then it permits this information to be spread in such a way where you don't have to trust the underlying networks. And you can flood it."

Drupal OpenAtrium is more like a forum, (that can be subscribed to, with push-email notifications). In other words the source document/content stays securely archived on the Drupal discussion forum, with email notifications and links to source for stakeholders' direct access. This also helps security and access to the actual information.

Also, any document in a library might have its own discussion and commentary thread, (with subscriptions, etc.)

Here's links to the White House Github, and some more details:

http://github.com/whitehouse

http://www.whitehouse.gov/developers

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/11/20/open-source-and-power-community

http://techpresident.com/news/23233/why-its-worth-noticing-white-houses-big-wet-kiss-drupal-and-github

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/69839.html

http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/white-house-drupal-community-here-we-made-these

http://fedscoop.com/white-house-we-believe-in-using-and-contributing-back-to-open-source-software/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/11/whitehousegov-releases-second-set-open-source-code

Drupal OpenAtrium is more like a forum, (that can be subscribed to, with push-email notifications). In other words the source document/content stays securely archived on the Drupal discussion forum, with email notifications and links to source for stakeholders' direct access. This also helps security and access to the actual information.

Also, any document in a library might have its own discussion and commentary thread, (with subscriptions, etc.)

Here's links to the White House Github, and some more details:

http://github.com/whitehouse

http://www.whitehouse.gov/developers

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/11/20/open-source-and-power-community

http://techpresident.com/news/23233/why-its-worth-noticing-white-houses-big-wet-kiss-drupal-and-github

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/69839.html

http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/white-house-drupal-community-here-we-made-these

http://fedscoop.com/white-house-we-believe-in-using-and-contributing-back-to-open-source-software/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/11/whitehousegov-releases-second-set-open-source-code

Nice spin, but in the end what you cannot spin are real unemployment numbers, which suck (8.3% with a ton of people out of the labor force as they gave up looking).

Yes, and the economy was shedding jobs at 8M/mo when Bush left office. You can't just turn that shit off in an instant. See this chart: http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/making-sure-everyone-america-has-seen-pelosi-jobs-chart

more open than in France, where you cannot discuss illegal actions by police anymore

The Whitehouse claims (or at least claimed) that it's running Drupal:

http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/whitehousegov-goes-drupal

Perhaps Akamai helps hide some of the drupal-isms?

There are some Drupal tags in the HTML for the home page, but of course that doesn't prove anything.

“I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier and all the rest,” Assange wrote Snorrason. “If you have a problem with me, piss off.”

A goodly number of the original members of Wikileaks have left and are griping about Assange's controlling nature.

This has led to the formation of OpenLeaks.

An article about the new OpenLeaks site states:

Unlike Wikileaks, comments from the organisation have been "anonymous" and the structure of Openleaks is said to be more democratic.

So, apparently at least one prominent member of Wikileaks (Daniel Domscheit-Berg, former German spokesman for Wikileaks) and unidentified "others" felt the organization was undemocratic and Assange himself feels like it's his to operate however he feels fit.

Sounds authoritarian to me.

WikiLeaks also promises its sources that it will work to get "maximum impact" for whatever they provide. If you're risking life imprisonment for "treason" by giving WikiLeaks internal documents then this actually means a lot. Nobody wants to take that risk only to have their work forgotten by the media after a couple of days. WikiLeaks knows that by staggering the release like this and keeping the media interested they'll encourage others to take that risk too.

"The promise that we make to our sources is not only will we defend them through every means that we have available, technological and legally and politically," said Assange calmly, "but we will try and get the maximum possible political impact for the material that they give to us, and..." There, Colbert interrupted. "So 'collateral murder' is to get political impact?" Assange responded by saying, "Yes, Absolutely." Source

I did some research. Actually quite a lot. If you read the title of the second link you referenced above it says:

"Sun's McNealy Advises Obama Administration on Open Source".

Even if we assume advising the administration is simply just writing a white paper, the question still remains where is that white paper?

The reason I posted the question to 'Ask Slashdot' is that question has not, in fact, been answered.

Whatever did in fact happen, the Obama administration clearly has forged ahead with its use of open source.

On whitehouse.gov alone:

- Drupal for Content Management
- Solr/lucene for search
- apache web server
- redhat OS for servers

The review is well timed. The book was from the beginning of the year, but since then the US Whitehouse has gone back to FOSS on its web site. It's using drupal. It's good to see more discussion of these tools. Everyone has heard of Drupal and plone and respect the capabilities. They are the heavy hitters like Apache2 for httpd.

What new FOSS CMS tools are corresponding to Lighttpd and nginx, ready and useful but not as visible as they could be?

I'm glad you brought that up! There are a few different matrices already, and Barack Obama tops them all, in my biased opinion:

http://www.techpresident.com/
TechPresident grades on Internet policy:
Barack Obama: A-
Hillary Clinton: B-
John McCain: C+

http://www.popularmechanics.com/geekthevote08
No real grading system here, but just look at the thorough policy statements by Barack Obama. One easy chart to look at is the policies that each candidate DID NOT ADDRESS:
Barack Obama: -1 = Firearms
Hillary Clinton: -2 = Firearms, Environment
John McCain: -4 = Auto, Infrastructure, Science/Education, Space

http://election2008.aaas.org/comparisons/
No direct grading system here either, but they provide a nice breakdown of all the major Science and Technology policy areas.

Check these out for yourself, but I think Obama is the clear winner at both sites:

http://www.techpresident.com/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4237333.html

Based on these, I feel confident saying this: anyone who claims Hillary has more structured, sound, or reasoned policy is either an idiot, or just willfully ignorant. Being married to a former President doesn't count as experience, or Laura Bush might be on the Republican ticket. And experience has shown Clintons to be the best Republican lackeys, not anything else. Remember that Mr. Clinton sold us out to China first, long before W renewed it! His bad fiscal decisions were masked by the Internet bubble, which broke soon after he left office. Take off your damn rose-colored Clinton history specs people! If Clinton was that great, how the hell did W Bush ever get elected???

This is not blackmail and I'm not a "squatter".

They wanted the profile and asked me to propose a fee, and indicated that Myspace was ok with this. I have no experience making such proposals and had no idea what to ask for.

I proposed a fee, and now they're accusing me of looking for a "big payday".

This is not blackmail. This is not me cashing in on the profile.

I do not believe that one person on that profile, who has personally witnessed the close personal attention I've dedicated to this community since 2004 would disagree with this.

Rather than restricting the product of those debates, we should instead make sure that our democracy and citizens have the chance to benefit from them in all the ways that technology makes possible.

Rather than restricting it...like

Eh, you know, there's pandering and then there's pandering. Pandering to people by promising to pay for their college education (suckers, you were just free labor for Clinton) sucks, pandering by promising to build a huge bridge in Alaska that isn't needed sucks, but pandering by suggesting something that costs no tax dollars, benefits everyone sans one or two corporations, and is a legitimate step toward a better society... ...well, that sort of pandering (it's to the /. demographic, as if that isn't obvious) is ok. He's probably just trying to recover from the myspace mess. Eh, so what.

A few comments I read in the techPresident blog that sum up my sentiments well (from RickRussellTX)...
Guys, step back and read the actual text
This whole "Anthony is a greedy schmuck" and "the Obama campaign tripped up" debate is a bunch of malarky. Read what was actually written:

(1) Campaign staffers had become concerned about the currency and accuracy of information on the site.

(2) Anthony was overworked and suggested that they should make him a consultant.

(3) They said they would rather have a one-time transfer, and he should name a price.

(4) He picked a number. They said no and went to MySpace management for resolution.

(5) MySpace came up with an eminently equitable solution. Mr. Anthony has been given the opportunity to build the site again with a different URL and full transfer of his friends list.

It's as simple as that. He's not a greedy bastard. They asked him to pick a number. Obama staffers are not bumbling idiots; they tried a couple of approaches, things weren't working out, and ultimately they decided to run the site themselves.

MySpacegate, indeed. Surely we can focus on the actual issues, and not this cyber-distraction?

We are firmly committed to empowering our users and protecting their rights. The situation with Senator Obama's profile became an unfortunate instance where a user gave a campaign functional control of a profile and the relationship between the two broke down. We felt under the circumstances that Senator Obama had the right to the URL containing his name and to the official campaign content that was provided, but that the user should retain the basic elements of the profile, including the friends who had been accumulated. Now that each Presidential candidate controls his/her own MySpace page, we don't expect this to be a problem again.

This is Joe Anthony.

This is not blackmail and I'm not a "squatter".

They wanted the profile and asked me to propose a fee, and indicated that Myspace was ok with this. I have no experience making such proposals and had no idea what to ask for.

I proposed a fee, and now they're accusing me of looking for a "big payday".

This is not blackmail. This is not me cashing in on the profile.

I do not believe that one person on that profile, who has personally witnessed the close personal attention I've dedicated to this community since 2004 would disagree with this.