Hacker News Reader

Comment by subroutine | Hacker News Reader

Is there a wikileak bias or do conservatives have better infosec?

Worth reading Julian Assange's blog on the purpose of wikileaks.

http://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf

To me the answer is that America's current "Left wing" is more in-line with the American Neoliberal world dominance agenda. Meanwhile Americas conservatives where they promote American dominance do so in public. Republican candidates debated candidly about how much they'd like the "bad guys" to get tortured. Meanwhile the DNCs favoured candidate got big donations from the defence industry and Saudi Arabia whilst talking about how important human rights are.

Wikileaks project is about attacking powerful in-groups deception of voters. All leaks help this cause by increasing the info-sec cost of conspiracy. But if the in-groups private messaging is in line with their publicly stated positions then what's there to leak?

Except Trump/Tillersion just happily approved the biggest arms deal with Saudi, while the previous Obama administration was halting this deal because of human right violations in Yemen. Iran deal was also in the line to reduce Saudi's influence on foreign policy.

> if the in-groups private messaging is in line with their publicly stated positions then what's there to leak?

1. We won't know unless there is a leak

2. I think the fact that there was a leak was as or more damaging to Clinton than the actual leak itself. Anecdotal... My dad: "but the emails!" Me: "what about them?" Dad: "They were hacked". Me: "what did they say?" Dad: "..."

3. So you're saying, yes there is a clear bias?

This answer would make sense if Wikileaks were the source of the leaks. As it is, they're not, so their motives don't really come into it.

Besides, I'm pretty sure what DTjr did would qualify as eminently leakable.

This is good point, although we don't know if WL is getting right wing stuff and just not leaking it.

You'd have to assume that a) WL ran such a tight ship you'd never heard a hint of it, which seems unlikely b) the suppliers of the information didn't try anyone else, which also seems unlikely.

There's definitely a bias. That's why the last paragraph of that announcement is there; that's wikileaks denying that they're a front for Russian intelligence, an allegation which is being made a lot these days.

There is probably (as this point) a political bias amongst people providing leaks to wikileaks.

The Trump administration has had plenty of leaks but they have all been published by traditional media (NY Times, CNN and so on).

"Leaks".

You cant be leaked on if you do not use technology! runs away

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers

"Now opposing the war, Ellsberg and his friend Anthony Russo photocopied the study in October 1969 intending to disclose it."

I read that the Russian intelligence services are still using typewriters for exactly this reason

Which reminds me of this great story: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/how-s...

Stuff was leaked while Bush was in office. One of the more memorable was the Blair-Bush documents.

Conservatives score much higher on loyalty and respect for authority as their moral foundations. Wouldn't surprise me if that's enough to explain the gap.

Macron is not exactly left-wing.

He is socially and culturally progressive - so he counts.

I think there might be nuance in the way US and France see the political scale, but I guarantee that he is not considered left here.

At best center, but since his last policies (cutting rent assistance, giving tax breaks to the rich), even the "center" image starts crumbling

Indeed - language has been co-opted. In the UK we see the same thing "moderate" "centrist" - these now mean big-business friendly policies, to the right of previous right wing governments.

Perhaps they learned after the Nixon tapes?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com