Well, before you mirror Wikifreaks, you may want to read this from BBC News: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11923766:
'A long list of key facilities around the world that the US describes as vital to its national security has been released by Wikileaks. In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. ... It inevitably prompts the question as to exactly what positive benefit Wikileaks was intending in releasing this document, he adds. Former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind condemned the move. "This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal," Sir Malcolm said. "This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing."' Cheers, Andy ________________________________________ From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Roberts [d...@parrot-farm.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 10:32 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WikiLeaks, US Gov't prohibition, Corporate Boycotts, etc. If you want to add your site to the (currently) 507 sites mirroring WikiLeaks, just follow the instructions here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/mass-mirror.html --Doug On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Owen Densmore <o...@backspaces.net<mailto:o...@backspaces.net>> wrote: On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Steve Smith wrote: > ... As usual, nicely thought out and articulated. For me its simple. I like WikiLeaks and the counter pressure they bring to bear. Not all corporations, politicians, militaries, labs, and so on are evil, but lately they've been throwing their power around way too much. And WL helps create a balance of power. It is absurd to argue that WL is putting solders and others "at risk". They have been put there by their govt. But I doubt Amazon and other ISPs feel they can afford the mess they'd get into by offering WL an account. So what to do? My first approach would be Peer to Peer. That removes the debate from the large and powerful to the citizenry. Our first question then would be "would I give 1% of my computer?". For me the answer is "yes". OK then, how? Well, the easiest would be Torrents. I'd simply subscribe to a set of Torrents that were encrypted archives that the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) or WL would sponsor (RSS, name convention, etc). This would massively replicate the archives, making it pretty difficult to crush, yet not "publish" the content in the clear until judged appropriate by WL. We'd then need to create a P2P web tech of some sort, possibly built on top of torrents, to publish the material WL deems ready for the public. I'd also ask EFF to vet WL. Why? I have several friends associated with them, and although a bit on the fringe, I think they'd do a good job of calibrating WL, and possibly keeping them within bounds of sanity. If not EFF, then Lawrence Lessig. Let the people decide! -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
