| anon.penet.fi was a precursor to WikiLeaks Position1 #85953
|
|
+Citations (1)
- CitationsAdd new citationList by: CiterankMapLink[1]
Author: Esther Dyson
Cited by: David Price 9:07 PM 14 December 2010 GMT
Citerank: (6) 85960Can be no clear boundary—but far away from the impulse of authority"There can be no clear line marking what needs to be kept secret (or never uttered) from what does not, but it should be drawn far from where most authorities put it – at least in a world where authorities are imperfect."959C6EF, 85961Leakers sin on our behalf so that we may live comfortablyPursuers of transparency sin on our behalf, so that we may live comfortably while they afflict the authorities at great personal risk and in disregard of (authorities' interpretation of) the law and sometimes even ethics.1198CE71, 85963Oppose abuses of authorityJulian Assange's is motivated by a concern about the abuse of authority.959C6EF, 85974Institutions that arent' fully accountable need a countervailing forceInstitutions are not fully accountable, it is useful to have an unaccountable countervailing institution to reveal their secrets.1198CE71, 86587Is diplomatic convenience really so important?8FFB597, 86589Degree of openness necessary to make those in power behave better109FDEF6
URL:
|
| Excerpt / Summary Long ago, I wrote about the Internet pioneer Julf Helsingius, who ran a precursor to WikiLeaks called anon.penet.fi. As I said then: “Anonymity in itself should not be illegal. There are enough good reasons for people to be anonymous that it should be [allowed] – at least in some places on the Net (as in real life).”
But anon.penet.fi got little notice: there weren’t enough people on the Internet at the time to read what was posted, and Julf did not use the WikiLeaks “business model” of cooperation with “establishment media.” Eventually, he had to shut down the site in a tussle with the Church of Scientology, which used copyright law to keep its secrets. |