Julian Assange's Old Blog

[eOs]

http://web.archive.org/web/20071020051936/http://iq.org/

I suggest giving it a read to anyone who is following Wikileaks.

[heavenlyboy34]

interesting read so far.

[phx420]

i want to blow frank rep

[t0rnado]

all this kid is guilty of is wanting to be heard

39 year old kid?

[phx420]

i hope he calls after

[pcosmar]

Sat 16 Jun 2007 : Nataliya
Did I ever tell you about the time Nataliya took me out to go get a drink with her? We go off looking for a bar and we can't find one. Finally Nataliya takes me to a vacant lot and says, 'Here we are.' We sat there for a year and a half, until sure enough, someone constructs a bar around us. Well, the day they opened we ordered a shot, drank it, and then burned the place to the ground. Nataliya yelled over the roar of the flames, 'Always leave things the way you found 'em!'

(with apologies)

lol
An interesting mind.
;)

[vita3]

"All who spend time in the spy world soon come to the view that the rest of the population lives their life in a sea fog as a tiny piece of cork buffeted by a vast ocean of concealed truth. True enough, but economics and scientific progress still dominates the spy world as every black budget bureaucrat finds to their classified horror when budget time arrives and they 'do the Pentagon poker"

[MN Patriot]

I am trying to figure this guy out. Notice how the media portrays him as The Enemy of the People, I haven't heard them explain what his motivations are for leaking all this stuff.

He seems to be a bit like the Unibomber, kind of a lefty bent on destroying society.

From his blog:


Sun 31 Dec 2006 : The non linear effects of leaks on unjust systems of governance
You may want to read The Road to Hanoi or Conspiracy as Governance ; an obscure motivational document, almost useless in light of its decontextualization and perhaps even then. But if you read this latter document while thinking about how different structures of power are differentially affected by leaks (the defection of the inner to the outer) its motivations may become clearer.
The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie. This must result in minimization of efficient internal communications mechanisms (an increase in cognitive "secrecy tax") and consequent system-wide cognitive decline resulting in decreased ability to hold onto power as the environment demands adaption.

Hence in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust systems are nonlinearly hit relative to open, just systems. Since unjust systems, by their nature induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance.

Only revealed injustice can be answered; for man to do anything intelligent he has to know what's actually going on.



Sat 16 Dec 2006 : Technology vs. Psychology

My general feeling is little outright new technology is needed. What is needed is an ability to integrate what already exists with a subtle understanding of what the real, as opposed to perceived political constraints are and this is what some of us have done. A lot of people are attracted to technology because of their relative strengths in understanding spacial relationships compared to psychological relationships. Both types of understanding give them some power over their environment. However, when they become activists, this fear of the projected, but unreal political threats (of which legalities are a subset) lead them to solutions which do not reflect the way people actually behave. Likewise, those people who see everything only through the lens of politics are similarly blinded; since people's basic make up is invariant, changes in the way they behave arise from changes in physical reality.

[Agorism]

He's libertarianish in my opinion. He knows that governments are corrupt or that power itself corrupts so he might as well expose it. My two cents on him.

[malkusm]

He's definitely coming from a more "left" point of view, what with all of the climate change material. Can't say he looks to be deceiving anyone, though.

[mczerone]

I am trying to figure this guy out. Notice how the media portrays him as The Enemy of the People, I haven't heard them explain what his motivations are for leaking all this stuff.

He seems to be a bit like the Unibomber, kind of a lefty bent on destroying society.

From his blog:

Those, um, "posts" don't compare at all to Kaczynski. Maybe the sentiment is similar, but Assange has absolutely no intellectual quality to his posts. They are mostly incoherent ramblings of a wounded mind.

At least Assange hasn't decided that violence is the answer as Kaczynski did.

[legion]

Well. He uses NetBSD. I like him.

[phx420]

i love frankrep

[legion]

Those, um, "posts" don't compare at all to Kaczynski. Maybe the sentiment is similar, but Assange has absolutely no intellectual quality to his posts. They are mostly incoherent ramblings of a wounded mind.

At least Assange hasn't decided that violence is the answer as Kaczynski did.

There is a group of people that believes they can replace the state completely with technology. Assange would seem to be one. His ideas would seem to be the complete opposite of Kaczynski. People that think this way aren't violent because getting people to accept a stateless society is a marketing problem. More violence would just lead to more of the same. Read his blogs in that light.

[mczerone]

There is a group of people that believes they can replace the state completely with technology. Assange would seem to be one. His ideas would seem to be the complete opposite of Kaczynski. People that think this way aren't violent because getting people to accept a stateless society is a marketing problem. More violence would just lead to more of the same. Read his blogs in that light.

But he said that he doesn't think that there should be much more technology.

I'm not convinced he's for a "stateless society" from what I've read, but a more "open" one, and he seems to fall prey to using language that suggests he really wants a technocrat/sociologist experts-managed society.


I did give him credit for being against using violent means though - and that is all that really matters to me. He can hold whatever views he wants, as long as he doesn't force me to share them.

[legion]

But he said that he doesn't think that there should be much more technology.

I'm not convinced he's for a "stateless society" from what I've read, but a more "open" one, and he seems to fall prey to using language that suggests he really wants a technocrat/sociologist experts-managed society.


I did give him credit for being against using violent means though - and that is all that really matters to me. He can hold whatever views he wants, as long as he doesn't force me to share them.

You didn't read what he is saying about "not needing much more technology."

What he's suggesting is that not much more technology is needed to throw off the state.

What he means is that the peasants these days are getting technology at the same time, if not faster than the kings. He's decided now is the time to act on his feelings.