Secret Chat Between Julian Assange and Eric Schmidt Published By WikiLeaks

New submitter milkasing writes "The Verge reports, 'Google chairman Eric Schmidt and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange secretly met in 2011 and held a lengthy interview, according to a transcript published on the whistleblowing site. The leak is surprisingly timely — Schmidt was apparently conducting research with Jared Cohen for the pair's book The New Digital Age, which is set to be released on Tuesday. Assange was under house arrest in England at the time the five-hour conversation took place. The conversation is a fascinating look into the minds of the two men, both of whom have had immeasurable impact on issues surrounding technology over recent years."

Comments

fascinating look

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" - Eric Schmidt

What a great guy!

Re:fascinating look

[Anonymous Coward]

I write bad poetry/ am gay but not out/ have cancer. I can think of many different things that people don't necessarily want to tell the world but aren't amoral acts. "I'm ashamed of X because X is questionably moral" and "I don't want to announce X because I'm embarrassed" are not the same thing.

Re:fascinating look

[HeckRuler]

Dude, didn't you pick up ANY context of what he was saying?

Here we go:

"People are treating Google like their most trusted friend. Should they be?"

"I think judgment matters. If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place, but if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time, and it’s important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act. It is possible that, that information could be made available to the authorities."

You should really take that as a not-too-subtle reminder that the cops are looking over his shoulder and he's required by law to turn all your info over to the cops.

If all your little brain is capable of retaining is the bold section, then big issues like Internet privacy might not be for you.

Re:fascinating look

[lars]

It's been something like three years since Schmidt said that, and people are still quoting it out of context (facepalm). The comment was in reference to activities performed using Google's services, and was qualified with "the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time, and it's important, for example that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act. It is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities."

People need to realize that spreading knee-jerk misconceptions like this is damaging to Internet activism. You aren't helping the privacy cause by building up straw men instead of attacking the actual problematic stuff. The members of congress who support this legislation and the corporations backing them must be loving that so many people are ignoring them to instead focus on telling everyone how bad Schmidt and Google are.

In what way is this a 'leak'?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a publication. Assange reserved the right to view/review/approve the transcript and presumably is doing this for the benefit of both sides. It benefits Assange that he gets to publish the precise transcript to rebut any criticism that they talked about anything else. Schmidt gains the same protection (ZOMG Google Chief Talks To Known Criminal About... What?) and also some pre-launch publicity. This interview is presumably not the underpinning of his entire book, nor featured in entirety as an excerpt, so it's not a leak of the content of the book either.

Re:I wondered

[Enderandrew]

When Lee Iacocca built Chrysler into a powerhouse, he said he didn't know anything about how to build a car.

You may be shocked to discover that CEOs specialize in running companies. They don't have to be expert engineers. And given Schmidt's previous statements (that people with nothing to hide shouldn't be so worried about privacy) I can understand why he'd never have an interest in TOR.

Fasciniating indeed...

[bayankaran]

Completed the first half of TFA. It is indeed fascinating.

Fascinating to know Julian Assange...his technical know how and philosophical underpinnings make him one of the foremost thinkers of our world. The way Assange connects geo-political issues, the ideas behind publishing, instant publishing to the basic design of Wikileaks is brilliant. (We have to put aside his issues in Sweden.)

Erich Schmidt comes across as a better version of Steve Ballmer. It would have been interesting if Larry Page / Sergey Brin had a conversation with Assange...they would be more interesting and the conversation would not be completely one sided.

Re:Rapists!

[fredprado]

I would flee if I was in his position as would anyone with a brain. Especially considering the ridiculous nature of such accusations and the horrible track record of injustice from Swedish justice in the last years (check the piratebay trials for reference). Sweden justice system has been consistently proved to be subservient to US interests.

Your second "accusations" is basically hearsay, and your third accusation is ridiculous and completely false.

Governments feel entitled to secrecy. They are not, and it is past time for them to be accountable for their acts. Assange is not a hero or a saint, just a man who likely did both good and bad things throughout his life as all men, but one of those things happened to be something very useful for mankind.

Re:Rapists!

[bill_mcgonigle]

"The Law" is not an objective measure of morality. If it were incorruptable, that may be arguable. But considering the nature of the charges, how the case was prosecuted, and the fact that one of his two accusers was kicked out of Cuba for being a CIA asset, the likelihood of his prosecution representing actual justice is very small. The government of Ecuador seems to concur.

Re:Rapists!

[fredprado]

The Swedish justice system left piratebay alone because that is what they should do accordingly to the law, but then, when enough pressure from US was applied they basically ignored their own law and did what US and their corporations wanted.

There is a motive for hearsay be unusable in court. That is because it means absolutely nothing. It is irrelevant.

The third accusation isn't bullshit. It was widely reported.

It was reported that the data leaked had the names. Nowhere there it is said that he asked for money to take the names of it, as you falsely accuse him of. He only asked help from the Amnesty to edit the names.

His partner outlined how the entire purpose of Wikileaks was to funnel money to Assange

Again hearsay. You seem to like it a lot.