Slashdot Mirror
In a 'Plot Twist', Wikileaks Releases Documents It Claims Detail Russia Mass Surveillance Apparatus (techcrunch.com)
WikiLeaks, believed by many to be a Kremlin front, surprised some observers Tuesday morning (Snowden called it a "plot twist") when it released documents linking a Russian tech company with access to thousands of citizens' telephone and internet communications with Moscow. From a report: Writing a summary of the cache of mostly Russian-language documents, Wikileaks claims they show how a long-established Russian company which supplies software to telcos is also installing infrastructure, under state mandate, that enables Russian state agencies to tap into, search and spy on citizens' digital activity -- suggesting a similar state-funded mass surveillance program to the one utilized by the U.S.'s NSA or by GCHQ in the U.K. (both of which were detailed in the 2013 Snowden disclosures). The documents which Wikileaks has published (there are just 34 "base documents" in this leak) relate to a St. Petersburg-based company, called Peter-Service, which it claims is a contractor for Russian state surveillance. The company was set up in 1992 to provide billing solutions before going on to become a major supplier of software to the mobile telecoms industry.
For politicians, revealing their misdeeds means you're an agent of their enemy. Not having any honesty or integrity themselves, they don't entertain the thought someone's agenda might be something else than supporting a particular political party.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
I guess he's getting tired of living in his Ecuadorian mom's basement and his 15 minutes of fame are over about an hour ago. Let that co-opted weasel dangle.
From the article:
Gee, ya think? They've now released thirty-four whole documents and they're looking for a pat on the back.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"believed by many to be a Kremlin front"
Who believes that?
They found the US government was spying on its citizens and released proof. Now they've discovered that Russia is spying on its citizens and released proof. Seems consistent.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
The headlines on Slashdot sure have changed over the years. You guys used to (figuratively) fellate Assange in the comments here, but one election cycle of punching your candidate for a change, and Wikileaks is a Russian front? That's some thin skin.
WikiLeaks, believed by many to be a Kremlin front,
List 5 such people who are not absolute retards. I'll wait.
There's no plot twist, there's just a final revelation which will be largely unknown among the Russians because most media outlets are controlled by the Kremlin, as well as the largest social network in Russia.
Everyone with a brain perfectly understands that Putin has always been lying about the state of surveillance and privacy in Russia. Largely there's none, because there's no law when it concerns the men in power. They do as they please.
Must we discount this achievement because he's not your model of perfection?
Yes, because IT WAS HER TURN!
That's all this boils down to. Remember: these fuckos were singing Assange's praises and nominating him for all the Nobel Prizes (even Chemistry!) when he was revealing shit about Bush.
Uh, it's widely believed in the intelligence community...
You mean that the people that wikileaks is trying to expose would want to tie them to the latest boogeyman in order to discredit them? Say it ain't so!
"but one election cycle of punching your candidate for a change, and Wikileaks is a Russian front?"
Sorry, but a guy who injected himself in the election specifically because he personally didn't like a candidate deserves that title. When you selectively data dump what you have, vocally timing it up to drip to influence the US election, both practices that were different from past releases of simply dumping everything he had in troves as fast as he properly process it, you've become a tool, esp when it's clear he also knew the nature of the source itself that was releasing the data to him to control the narrative and he continued to participate.
It's not /. that changed. It's the standards and behavior of the person running Wikileaks that did.
And despite the fact that the Trump administration has been leaking like a sieve, Wikileaks has released nothing on them. When you're an organization that prides itself on integrity, choosing sides politically is not a good look.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I have to agree, but the point stands. Whether or not Assange is a pompous conceited ass has no bearing on his opinions or actions.
What we're looking like is a reflection of a fundamental problem with democracy. Democracy depends on an electorate that is educated on and involved in the issues. The problem is that issues are hard. They're full of gray areas and squirrelly corner cases.
But you know what's very easy? Deciding whether you like someone or not. Then if you conflate that with them being a good or bad person, and further decide that you'll trust all the "good" people completely and distrust all "bad" ones completely... Well then you'll never have to deal with difficult thinking ever again.
How do you know that you're one of those people? Well, if you can find a group of people somewhere whom you agree with pretty much all the time, that's a reliable sign that you don't really think for yourself. On the other hand, let's say you don't really fit in anywhere; you have some strong disagreements with the people you agree with most, and sometimes think people you dislike probably have a point... Congratulations then, that means you think for yourself. The fundamental philosophy of our government, of our very society was built around people like you. Kind of sad, when you think about it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
A corrupt, incompetent candidate who allegedly said "can't we just drone this guy"? Golly Gee, I wonder why Assange might not like her. Were you whining, though, that Assange "just didn't like Bush" when he was publishing information about that president's war crimes?
You didn't answer the guys point though. Your original thought was "you shouldn't dismiss the truth because it's delievered by an ass."
Now you think Assange is an ass you seem pretty willing to dismiss the truth simply because he tells you it.
We aren't wondering why you think Assange is an ass, we're wondering why you have changed the amount of value you place on being told the truth. I'm willing to be that you only want the truth as long as it's convenient and easy to slot into what you allready believe...