

Julian Assange on Bill Maher last night [video] - CorsairSanglot
http://www.hbo.com/real-time-with-bill-maher/episodes/0/271-episode/video/february-8-2013-julian-assange

======
shantanubala
I think Assange's interview at TED was a much more concrete discussion of
Wikileaks and its role in politics -- there were _real_ examples in the
interview:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_...](http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html)

I feel like Maher hinted at a lot of different things, but never actually went
in-depth. The discussion was very vague. I would have loved to learn about
more cases where Wikileaks was able to provide information that was able to
influence a government's actions.

~~~
mikevm
I feel that Assange dodged a few very serious questions posed by Maher.

What if Wikileaks does leak out documents that could escalate a conflict?

~~~
dlss
I think this is a wrong question. The premise is that by picking and choosing
which stories to cover you can make the world better for your world view. From
this sort of logic you can make the case that Google shouldn't support all
possible queries -- what if some of the people using Google use the results to
cause harm?

This is a wrong way of looking at things because although some of the help
Google provides people will cause the world to be a worse place, the vast
majority of its effects are positive... for every person who looks up movie
showtimes so they can go shoot people hundreds of millions of people are using
google to have a fun family afternoon. Just because a tool can be used poorly
doesn't mean it is wrong that it exists.

WikiLeaks is a tool for whistle blowers. It's a tool for people with access to
information they feel a moral obligation to share with the world. It's
designed to let them do that without throwing their life away in the process.
Some of these whistle blowers will be doing things you or I disagree with,
some will be doing things we do agree with. That, in balance, this is a good
tool to have exist seems straightforward to me.

As for conflict vs non-conflict, I think that conflict often is the first step
toward long term improvement. If your government has been lying to you about
why it's doing what it's doing, telling everyone the truth is virtually
guaranteed to create conflict. Conflict of this sort is _good_. Look at the
huge escalation of conflict in the middle east brought about by the cable
leaks (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring> is the least biased link I
can find, and a reasonable place to start). I completely agree that there are
a lot of bad outcomes from these conflicts so far (60,000 deaths in the Syrian
civil war, etc)... I'm just optimistic that we'll get some real governmental
reforms in the long run (either from successful revolutions, or from other
dictators being wary of betraying their people).

~~~
mikevm
I'm not sure whether the analogy to Google applies here, as leaks are private
information, not to be shared with third parties and Google search queries
merely search what is already published.

I was alluding to Bill Maher's example of the Cold War stand-off between the
US and Russia. I thought it was a proper example where leaking something out
could've caused WW3. But you are right in a sense that this is a hypothetical
and we're not really sure how things would really turn out.

Btw, here's an interesting leak that if it was not released, then Israel and
US forces might've had some advantage over the Iranians (in case of a war),
but now they probably don't:
<http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=259954>

~~~
betterunix
"here's an interesting leak that if it was not released, then Israel and US
forces might've had some advantage over the Iranians (in case of a war), but
now they probably don't:"

We _don't_ have a military advantage of Iran? Really? I am not sure if you've
noticed, but the US and Israel have some of the most advanced militaries in
the world. If the US were at war with Iran, the Iranians would need the help
of some other powerful nation to have anything that even resembles a chance of
winning.

If that is really the worst leak you can find, I think we are pretty safe in a
world with Wikileaks.

~~~
gaius
_We don't have a military advantage of Iran? Really? I am not sure if you've
noticed, but the US and Israel have some of the most advanced militaries in
the world. If the US were at war with Iran, the Iranians would need the help
of some other powerful nation to have anything that even resembles a chance of
winning._

Hate to break it to you, but technology isn't everything. Just ask the
Taliban.

~~~
betterunix
First of all, the leak I was talking about _was about technology_ , supposedly
robbing Israel and the US of a particular technical advantage over the Iranian
military. If technology is not everything, then the importance of that leak
was greatly overstated; if technology matters, the importance of the leak is
still greatly overstated.

That being said, while it is true that coordination, tactics, and strategy
_can_ outweigh technical advantages, better technology confers a tactical
advantage to an army. The greater the difference in two armies technologies,
the more pronounced the tactical advantage is. The Taliban did not see
anything resembling a victory when the US attacked Afghanistan; they survive
now by hiding in caves, and their overall strategy is based on intimidating
civilians.

If you want to point to a case where superior technology did not result in
victory, you should have pointed to Nazi Germany. There can be little question
that the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine had better technology than the Allies,
but ultimately Germany lost. I do not think Iran is really in the same
position as the Allies were in...

------
tomflack
Youtube link for internationals -
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieO0I6xJ_zQ>

~~~
quink
The HBO link seems to work here in Australia - unusual :|

~~~
tomflack
Heh, I opened it, enabled flash and nothing happened... assumed it wasn't
working (Australia also)

~~~
jlgreco
Same thing happened to me, but I'm in the US.

------
barking
I used to think that Assange was a bit paranoid but the case of Sami al-Saadi
(<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20715507>) and the sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut
approach in the Arron Swartz prosecution has changed my view 180 degrees.

------
CorsairSanglot
The book Assange is shilling ("Cypherpunks") is available from OR Books here:

<http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/cypherpunks/>

OR Books is also publishing a book called "Hacking Politics" about the anti-
SOPA/PIPA protests, featuring contributions from Swartz, Ron Paul, Kim Dotcom,
Alex Ohanian, Cory Doctorow, and Zoe Lofgren. It is pay what you will.

<http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/hacking-politics-2/>

Note that both books can be purchased with Bitcoin.

------
kintamanimatt
He never really answered the question as to why he thinks that Sweden is ready
and willing to extradite him to the US, and that him being wanted for
questioning is a pretense.

Is there some evidence that supports his belief?

~~~
foobarqux
Among other things Swedish prosecutors refuse to question him in the UK,
something which has been done recently for an alleged murderer. There is no
obvious reason why they would refuse and none has been given by the
prosecutor.

~~~
philwelch
I don't see how this matters anyway. After they question him, they will still
want him to go to jail in Sweden pending trial, and he will still be in the
Ecuadorean embassy pretending to be a political prisoner.

~~~
foobarqux
It matters because it is believed the Swedish prosecutor does not have enough
evidence to actually bring charges. After questioning she will either have to
bring charges or drop the case. On the other hand, as you say, questioning
Assange in the UK has no obvious downside for the prosecutor.

~~~
philwelch
Assange's supporters and conspiracy theorists will believe anything except the
possibility that someone with a documented history of narcissistic behavior
actually sexually assaulted someone.

~~~
foobarqux
You can believe that Assange had sex with someone without a condom, in
violation of their expressed wishes, without believing that 1. sufficient
evidence exists for a case to be brought 2. that he is safer in Sweden from
onward extradition to the US for what arguably amounts to political
persecution.

~~~
tptacek
If this was how criminal law worked, Hans Reiser would be working on another
filesystem from his house in Oakland right now. Nobody on the Internet
believed the case brought against him either.

You cannot reasonably believe that he is less safe in Sweden than the UK.
That's an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. The list of
reasons why his safety changes not- at- all after going to Sweden is
compelling and widely documented. Occam's razor strongly indicates that
Assange isn't going to Sweden because he simply doesn't want to face criminal
proceedings.

~~~
rdl
Or, remaining a "fugitive" is an excellent PR strategy for himself and
wikileaks.

~~~
tptacek
Conceded.

------
berlinbrown
Every show is on DVD. But the one show I love and don't have HBO for, Bill
Maher's show. I can't watch old episodes.

sucks.

~~~
joezydeco
The audio is available as a free podcast from iTunes.

~~~
berlinbrown
That is true. But I still want to see their expressions.

~~~
joezydeco
Sure. But if you've seen enough episodes, you realize the visuals aren't that
big a deal. It's not like Maher is a prop comic or anything.

~~~
berlinbrown
Screw this, I can't tell who is talking.

Give the freaking DVD. I am setting up a petition.

------
DiabloD3
Weird, I'm on Firefox and live in the US and all I get is a black screen. It
seems to be a full window flash object, but nothing works. Flash works on my
machine.

~~~
Kim_Bruning
it took a minute to start up for me.

------
contingencies
Summary... nothing really new.

Some fairly loaded leading questions and the classic false accusation of
charges with regards to Swedish request for extradition (though perhaps in the
knowledge that Julian would have an opportunity to correct it).

Julian made an appeal to people from within the Whitehouse with access to
secret laws and procedures affecting citizen's rights to come forward and
share them with the public via Wikileaks.

Bill makes smart-arse crack about sending in Ben Affleck "like we did in
Iran".

~~~
Already__Taken
This is what all US media looks like, from the outside I can't tell what's
news and what isn't. Usually I have to wait for a shot with a studio audience
in it.

------
felipelalli
amazing

