
How the US government inadvertently created Wikileaks - stfu
http://pandodaily.com/2013/09/14/how-the-us-government-inadvertently-created-wikileaks/
======
njharman
Of course they (and other overly secret governments) did. Wikileaks reason for
existence is transparency. US Government's secrecy _forced_ the eventual
creation of wikileaks or things like it. Same with Snowden. Protesters,
leakers, et al don't spontaneously erupt. They are created by bad governments.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
" _Protesters, leakers, et al don 't spontaneously erupt. They are created by
bad governments._"

There are two models that could be at work here: (1) "dissident agents" occur
randomly (i.e. they _do_ "spontaneously erupt") but have greater value and
visibility when they occur amidst bad government or (2) bad governments cause
good agents to become "dissident agents".

In all likelihood it's a combination of both: people have varying tendencies
of becoming "dissidents". Some people will rebel without a cause, others will
follow their leaders to hell. Most are in between, more likely to (a) become,
and (b) be empowered upon becoming, dissidents the more "bad" a government
becomes.

There are varying opinions of what constitutes "bad" government. It would not
be surprising that there are correlations between certain worldviews and their
populations' propensities to engage in dissident activity. Stylised: pro-war
advocates might be expected to go dissident quicker than pro-peace advocates.

Point is it isn't obvious. The more likely outcome would have been for Julian
to have shut up and kept going his way. What made this time different is worth
looking into.

------
devx
I guess you could call this another one of those "blowbacks" that US has been
creating by being too aggressive with certain things or people.

When tons of documents start to become "classified", when they shouldn't be,
this sort of thing is inevitable.

~~~
walid
What is more detrimental is the uselessness of the phrase "classified" in the
after math of leaks. When leaks show that a lot of classified documents are
not really that important it will desensitize people to the word classified in
the long run and when really important and classified info is leaked, it will
be treated with carelessness.

------
r0h1n
> "So here you have a non-US citizen at a foreign university doing graduate
> work studies, and the United States government came barreling in and not
> only snuffed out the funding and killed his studies, it also barred him from
> knowing what it was he had been funded to research."

Help me understand this. How could the US Govt bar Assange from knowing what
_he_ had already been researching at the University of Melbourne (funded by
the NSA and DARPA apparently)?

~~~
derefr
If

1\. document X becomes classified;

2\. you are have a government security clearance;

and 3. your government security clearance isn't high enough to be allowed to
look at X,

then you must not look at X, keep copies of X, etc. even if X is public
knowledge. This came up more recently in the context of government employees
getting in trouble for having publicly-leaked _but still classified_ documents
on their computers.

I imagine, if the research you were funded to create is classified out from
under you, you have to delete all public copies of it, and have to pretend you
don't _officially_ "know" it any more.

~~~
gpvos
Can Australian citizens have a US security clearance?

~~~
csharpminor
Yes, foreign nationals are allowed to obtain basic security clearances.
However, in the defense and intelligence communities classified material may
also be marked "NOFORN" – no foreign nationals regardless of their security
clearance.

~~~
malandrew
It would be nice if every single government secret classified not classified
as NOFORN became public very quickly (a few years at absolute most). I can
understand justifications of keeping data marked NOFORN secret for many many
years, but see no reason why the American people should support secrecy that
lasts any longer than the amount of time it takes to achieve some political
objective.

------
NAFV_P
Julian should not lie on his side like that to use a computer. You can end up
with awful back problems and numb fingers.

~~~
zeckalpha
And awkward photos.

~~~
NAFV_P
I'm thinking he had trouble finding enough space to use his laptop.

------
walid
What is strange is that the government used the classification of information
as a way control it. But what stops others from conducting the same research?
In fact I would argue that classifying info will result in people pursuing
that info even more than other non-classified research. The Streisand effect
all over again.

~~~
anonymousDan
Money, no one else will fund it.

------
nwzpaperman
Wikileaks is nothing new, folks. What is the actual innovation here?
Governments and the interested parties that fund them through bond purchases
have always over-stepped the practical boundaries in the quest to maintain and
increase their power and control in relation to their peers and the masses.

It is true, however, that there would be no market for anything such as
Wikileaks if there was no opaqueness in the public sector.

"Send us an anonymous package with information through post and we will vet it
and publish it, if it's juicy" is nothing new under the sun though.

