|
On December 09 2010 06:05 MaYuu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 05:22 mahnini wrote:On December 09 2010 05:19 exeexe wrote:On December 09 2010 05:14 mahnini wrote:
truth isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes truth has consequences. The following really sums up my thoughts about your post: Lies isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes lies has consequences i know you're very zealous about being righteous and everything but imagine yourself as someone in out in iraq and you just heard thousand of military logs were just leaked to the public. i'm no expert in military affairs but i would go ahead and guess that it would endanger operations over there and as a consequence people could die. Just a thought... Maybe you should think about that before going to war?
Many people join the army because they want to defend their country. They didn't choose to go to Iraq, and even those who did so believed that it was in the best interests of the US/World. It's not about whether or not the war was right, it's about the people who are still there, and the fact that there are people who would delight in being able to use information provided by wikileaks to murder american troops, or Iraqi civilans who aided in the invasion. Because of this, wikileas does have the moral responsibility to make sure that the information is either dated, not related to the identities of people who could be put at risk, etc. So far they've been pretty good at that (the video of the american troops shooting down Journalists was something the world needed to see), but recently they've been way more extreme with their releases. As far I know there's only been a couple identities exposed or something like that, but people need to realize that if wikileaks actually continues on this path, people could die.
In this case, there's a fine line between exposing war crimes and committing them. What scares me the most is that people are ready to call any potential deaths resulting from leaks of information as casualties in the interests of freedom information. People like that actually give some measure of credibility to the constant stream of idiocy coming from politicians about the whole issue.
If you think fighting for freedom of information should be carried out indiscriminately, without consideration for casualties or the property of companies that have no interest but to extricate themselves from the mess, then your philosophy is no better than the one you're condemning the US government for following.
|
its up now 
|
On December 09 2010 06 SharkSpider wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 06:05 MaYuu wrote:On December 09 2010 05:22 mahnini wrote:On December 09 2010 05:19 exeexe wrote:On December 09 2010 05:14 mahnini wrote:
truth isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes truth has consequences. The following really sums up my thoughts about your post: Lies isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes lies has consequences i know you're very zealous about being righteous and everything but imagine yourself as someone in out in iraq and you just heard thousand of military logs were just leaked to the public. i'm no expert in military affairs but i would go ahead and guess that it would endanger operations over there and as a consequence people could die. Just a thought... Maybe you should think about that before going to war? Many people join the army because they want to defend their country. They didn't choose to go to Iraq, and even those who did so believed that it was in the best interests of the US/World. It's not about whether or not the war was right, it's about the people who are still there, and the fact that there are people who would delight in being able to use information provided by wikileaks to murder american troops, or Iraqi civilans who aided in the invasion. Because of this, wikileas does have the moral responsibility to make sure that the information is either dated, not related to the identities of people who could be put at risk, etc. So far they've been pretty good at that (the video of the american troops shooting down Journalists was something the world needed to see), but recently they've been way more extreme with their releases. As far I know there's only been a couple identities exposed or something like that, but people need to realize that if wikileaks actually continues on this path, people could die. In this case, there's a fine line between exposing war crimes and committing them. What scares me the most is that people are ready to call any potential deaths resulting from leaks of information as casualties in the interests of freedom information. People like that actually give some measure of credibility to the constant stream of idiocy coming from politicians about the whole issue. If you think fighting for freedom of information should be carried out indiscriminately, without consideration for casualties or the property of companies that have no interest but to extricate themselves from the mess, then your philosophy is no better than the one you're condemning the US government for following.
Agreed. Wikileaks should anonymize the infromation wherever possible. Also, I think they should primarily publish information that uncovers unethical behavior, violation of laws and blatant lies.
But if in doubt, I think the right of the public to be informed outweighs potential risks to individuals.
Otherwise, potential risk to others can be used as a killer-argument. Whenever goverments or corporations behave unethically or violate laws that will cause anger or aggression (which is mostly understandable because people dislike being lied to or exploited) and that bears the risk of someone getting hurt.
My alternative solution: stop with the nonsense and do it like Kant did (categorical imperative). That way, no one gets hurt. Also, if you don't engage in unethical or criminal activities, you won't be bothered by wikileaks.
|
This is why I have VISA instead of MasterCard.
Switching from MasterCard to Visa: Priceless
=P
+ Show Spoiler +j/k
Actually this is serious and I feel bad for MasterCard.
I Really do not like WikiLeaks,specially after releasing those documents. It is seriously textbook espionage what the people working for that site are doing. Hope every single one of them pays the price for their errors.
|
On December 09 2010 06:41 Electric.Jesus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 06 gostunv wrote:If the people with power would start to treat the normal people as fucking human beings and not as pigs then the people with power would have nothing to fear in regards of wikileaks this quote stood out to me from one of the posters here. Honestly, the general public is dumb as shit. Most are just lambs to whatever popular opinion somebody more articulate than them have said. I shudder to think what the world might be like if governments actually listened to what the masses think. Maybe most poeple are dumb as shit. but democracy says that all are to have equal rights. If you dislike that then you should probabaly think abut a military career in North Korea and aim for a good position there. I agree that democracy might have a flaw in that idiots get to vote. But then again, maybe people are becoming increasingly naive and uninformed specifically because because they are being constantly shut out. I think this is a vicious cycle where the idea that stupid people must not participate leads to results that justify the idea via self-fulfilling prophecy.
Oh I believe that everybody should have equal rights. I just dont believe they should have equal say in everything. I wouldnt want to talk to 20 regular old people on my street, instead of talking to 1 nuclear scientist on how to build a nuclear reactor for my battlecruiser.
and yes maybe people are more than ever pawns because of the government. But I think most people dont care. I have no data or evidence to back up such a claim but I would think most people would be happy enough if they have a job/career that pays and maybe a partner and some friends without knowing that their government assassinated a rogue leader in Africa or something. People might SAY "oh thats so horrible. im so glad I got informed", but few people actually really care that it happened.
|
On December 09 2010 06:53 SharkSpider wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 06:05 MaYuu wrote:On December 09 2010 05:22 mahnini wrote:On December 09 2010 05:19 exeexe wrote:On December 09 2010 05:14 mahnini wrote:
truth isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes truth has consequences. The following really sums up my thoughts about your post: Lies isn't some omnipotent all curing concept. sometimes lies has consequences i know you're very zealous about being righteous and everything but imagine yourself as someone in out in iraq and you just heard thousand of military logs were just leaked to the public. i'm no expert in military affairs but i would go ahead and guess that it would endanger operations over there and as a consequence people could die. Just a thought... Maybe you should think about that before going to war? Many people join the army because they want to defend their country. They didn't choose to go to Iraq, and even those who did so believed that it was in the best interests of the US/World. It's not about whether or not the war was right, it's about the people who are still there, and the fact that there are people who would delight in being able to use information provided by wikileaks to murder american troops, or Iraqi civilans who aided in the invasion. Because of this, wikileas does have the moral responsibility to make sure that the information is either dated, not related to the identities of people who could be put at risk, etc. So far they've been pretty good at that (the video of the american troops shooting down Journalists was something the world needed to see), but recently they've been way more extreme with their releases. As far I know there's only been a couple identities exposed or something like that, but people need to realize that if wikileaks actually continues on this path, people could die. In this case, there's a fine line between exposing war crimes and committing them. What scares me the most is that people are ready to call any potential deaths resulting from leaks of information as casualties in the interests of freedom information. People like that actually give some measure of credibility to the constant stream of idiocy coming from politicians about the whole issue. If you think fighting for freedom of information should be carried out indiscriminately, without consideration for casualties or the property of companies that have no interest but to extricate themselves from the mess, then your philosophy is no better than the one you're condemning the US government for following.
Then don't go to war. You know, a country can exist and you can protect it without declaring wars and such.
|
Visa.com is down now.
That's so cute
|
On December 09 2010 07:34 s.a.y wrote:
Visa.com is down now.
That's so cute
Almost.
I can load it, just took me a couple minutes.
|
On December 09 2010 06:53 SharkSpider wrote:
If you think fighting for freedom of information should be carried out indiscriminately, without consideration for casualties or the property of companies that have no interest but to extricate themselves from the mess, then your philosophy is no better than the one you're condemning the US government for following.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Ben Franklin
It's ridiculous that the leakers are being blamed. If the politicians didn't commit and hide illegal or dubious activities in the first place we wouldn't be in this mess.
|
|
|
hahaha this is amazing, are they going to do more?
is it down now? I was able to see the numbers just a minute ago
|
thx, going into pc cafe to buy games right away.
|
their twitter and pastebin account has been deleted
|
If anyone finds this interesting, both Facebook and Twitter have just shut down Anon's/Operation Payback's sites respectively.
My question is, will these attacks raise awareness and outrage about what these financial institutions are doing, or will it cast a bad light on Wikileaks and Assange?
+ Show Spoiler +Edit: Guy above me beat me to it 
|
On December 09 2010 08:04 Sclol wrote:
their twitter and pastebin account has been deleted
np i copyd em in .txt if some work, huge giveaway on steam games soon
|
On December 09 2010 08:04 Sclol wrote:
their twitter and pastebin account has been deleted
i think you can still find the post
|
edit: im not the guy hes talking about re his q.
On December 09 2010 00:13 Aim Here wrote:
Aim Here, I'd love if you responded to my post quoting yours, on page 2. Imagine some property (say, a small office building, or a company car) that is worth less to MasterCard than a few hours of uptime on mastercard.com. Would you also be in favor of 4chan blowing up that building, or torching that car?
(Note that the car/building hypo is favorable to you, because destruction of the car or office building wouldn't be as much harm to MC's customers as taking down mastercard.com)
AIM i think you are taking this WAAAAAAY out of context... like your needing to prove your point by exaggerating things here. Just because someone supports the fact the MC website went down doesn't mean they would want a building blown up? Stop assuming things.
At the end of the day, the governments will use this wikileaks 'event' as an excuse to censor the internet and take away sites that are NEEDED even if you don't think they are. I dont mind if they take down all the stuff that should be taking down (ie child pornography etc). But if i go on the internet one day and want to look up "ROSWELL" or "JFK Assassination cover up" and get no search results.
That will be the day the internet died. bye bye miss internet pie.
So in summary, Im happy that there are groups out there doing something about this and not letting it slip under the establishments 'rug' of silence so quickly. BUT that doesn't mean i want to burn a car of blow up a building.
|
Anyone else considering how hilarious it would be if one of the people who got the numbers acutally had their number in there?
|
On December 09 2010 07:44 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Ben Franklin It's ridiculous that the leakers are being blamed. If the politicians didn't commit and hide illegal or dubious activities in the first place we wouldn't be in this mess.
Why everyone is quoting the same thing from BF over and over again?
He said that in the XVIII-th century, things have changed since then. And essential liberty refers to the Bill of Rights in the US (the second amendment specifically), other countries have their own you know, and this quote can mean a lot of different things to different people.
Edit: And how about giving up essential liberty for permanent safety? This seems fine with the quote.
|
On December 09 2010 07:19 carloselcoco wrote:+ Show Spoiler +j/k
Actually this is serious and I feel bad for MasterCard.
I Really do not like WikiLeaks,specially after releasing those documents. It is seriously textbook espionage what the people working for that site are doing. Hope every single one of them pays the price for their errors.
I totally agree with this
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
