Hacker News Reader

Comment by ars | Hacker News Reader

Much more likely is that wikileaks assured him "Don't worry, it'll be fine." Wikileaks is much more concerned with getting lots of publicity than with actually getting him someplace safe (otherwise why would they tell everyone in advance what they are going to do).

He had to know that canceling his passport would be the very first thing the US would do.

View on HN

You do have to wonder what "plan" snowden had... he was identified publicly on June 9th, but didn't leave HK until the June 23rd using the incredibly creative idea of leaving on a plane using his real passport/ID. Makes me think there was no plan at all -- he was just planning to stay in HK originally...

http://news.yahoo.com/timeline-u-hong-kong-communication-sno...

My take is that he panicked. He knows he's researched, and might be killed, and he reads what's going on on internet, and he just starts to freak out. He has to start freaking out. In the end he's just convinced he's going to lose if he stays in HK, he cannot stand that anymore and decide to cancel his "plan" and leave HK.

That's unfair. Wikileaks got involved because they wanted to help. Things haven't worked out as planned.

HN readers are so fickle. The biggest wafflers on the internet. You will find no loyalty here.

You're making some pretty serious assumptions regarding WikiLeaks' intentions, and even if you're right, assuming whatever advice they offer is good is about more than their intentions, it's about a very difficult international situation that's not going to be simple even if you know the ins and outs of traveling without the US government chasing you.

Yeah, HN readers are fickle. Suggesting we/they should be "loyal" to anything, though, is ridiculous; loyalty is, depending on your point of view, either a way to trap suckers into shitty agreements or something you should only grant to people in whose intentions and abilities you have absolute confidence. I personally don't see either of those as good.

I'm not fickle - I started having doubts on December 24, 2009 when they shut down the website to beg for money. I started wondering if their goal was money for the founder or leaking things.

My doubts grew larger on September 25, 2010 when Daniel Domscheit-Berg aired his complaints.

And dislike was finalized on October 22, 2010 - not because of what they released, but because they shut down the archive.

It turned from WikiLeaks to AssangeLeaks after that. Instead of releasing anything, they released only what Assange wanted to release.

They have done nothing since to regain the name "wiki". Assange has made himself into the story.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com