Trite, I know – but I like it.
Comments
Trackbacks
-
[...] Great comparison! Amplify’d from unreasonablefaith.com [...]
-
[...] Data Security | Unreasonable Faith. [...]
-
[...] Data Security por Custador [...]
-
[...] via [...]
-
[...] Wikileaks y Facebook: las diferencias unreasonablefaith.com/2011/01/15/data-security/ por talibancillo hace 2 segundos [...]
-
[...] ainda de um novo tudo-em-um da Sony.Julian Assange VS Mark ZuckerbergVilão ou Homem do Ano? Esta imagem resume bem a dúvida e lança uma pista sobre a sua resolução:Jailbreak do Windows Phone 7 em [...]
-
[...] via unreasonablefaith.com [...]
-
[...] source « Peder – Daylight [feat. Signe Marie Schmidt-Jacobsen] [...]
-
[...] Fuente | unreasonablefaith [...]
-
[...] by pacon007 [link] [30 comments] [...]
-
[...] the difference between Facebook and Wikileaks ____________________________ Reply With Quote [...]
-
[...] the difference between Facebook and Wikileaks ____________________________ Reply With Quote [...]
-
[...] Found on unreasonable faith. [...]
-
[...] via un reasonable faith [...]
-
[...] Questa vignetta è ossessivamente giusta. Assange dice: “Io vi dò delle informazioni private riguardanti le grandi corporazioni gratis e sono cattivo.” Zuckeberg (fondatore di Facebook) risponde “Io dò le vostre informazioni private alle corporazioni in cambio di denaro, e sono l‘uomo dell’anno.” [...]
-
[...] copied from here [...]
-
[...] Data Security [...]
-
[...] via un reasonable faith [...]
I don’t think it’s all that trite. Who the subject of the information is tends to change how we think about its proper disposition, often without any explicit logical basis. This calls attention to that pretty sharply, I think.
To be fair, Assange was a runner up for man of the year.
Incorrect. Julian Assange collected 20 times more votes, but only after a while he was selected for only a Reader’s Choice award
Wikileaks is not any private information, also the way they got is is not very legal. This is basically espionage. They are exposing it to the 7 billion people.
Facebook is also not exposing your private information to the world wide web so anyone that can access it. Facebook would be bad if it hacked your bank account and leaked this information to the 7 billion people. And as far as I know, people give permissions to expose their data because they provide the login and password to their FB account for that game, or poker or virtual card.
Um, the legality of how it came to be in their possession is irrelevant. If a government whistleblower approaches, say, the New York Times with classified information that presents something the public needs to know (in the interests of the functioning of democracy, their own safety, or any number of other justifications), isn’t the NYT duty-bound to publish it? (See also: Pentagon Papers).
sidetrack: elemenope, i LOVE your name. =)
yeah that is a good name. what does ‘ elemenope’ mean anyway? It sounds to me like a combination between an emerald and an envelope…..and maybe a couple other things as well. k random comment, sry.
Uh… I think it’s pretty easier than that :p
Lemme help you out. ABCDEFG….
Facebook’s horrid security practices DO expose your private information to the WWW, especially through the poor control of 3rd party apps that are often hack tools.
And I’m with Elemenope on this one. Legality is arbitrary, and in this case is being used to harass Assange for doing what our “democratic” government ought to be doing on its own. Secrecy has little place in a true government of the people, for the people and by the people.
Providing a disk drive to a whistle-blower is not ‘basically espionage’ it is basically freeing information suppressed to avoid embarrassment OR even worse actually, you know, improve the world. How are 7 billion or 7 hundred people going to use this REDACTED and heavily vetted information to do anything except becoming better informed.
When I saw the thumbnail on FB, I thought the top picture was Barney from How I Met Your Mother…
Me Too!
The quotes are from a Saturday Night Live sketch a few weeks ago
http://www.hulu.com/watch/202005/saturday-night-live-a-message-from-mark-zuckerberg
Hitler was also Time’s Man of the Year.
What’s your point? Time’s Person of the Year is meant to recognize the entity that “for better or for worse, …has done the most to influence the events of the year.” It’s hard to argue that Hitler was not the most influential person of the year when he won.
I think Simon might be trying to subvert the premise of the blog (which you yourself are arguing against too): That the “person of the year” is someone who has done something good or worth celebrating. That’s obviously not the case.
Time Magazine hasn’t changed much, obviously. Just wait until Zuckerberg runs for political office….
Assange needs “the gift of discernment.” Having once held a TS clearance, I know that it is not immediately apparent WHY some information is classified. Some tidbit about a political figure’s personal life may seem irrelevant to most, but could actually be a key ingredient in a covert operation. I wish he’d stick to releasing corporate info, except for the more egregious human rights violations of the military.
Having held the UK equivalent way back when (DV clearance), I would agree except that Wikileaks is working with the New York Times and The Guardian to go through the leaks and determine what is and is not dangerous to release. They’re only releasing a tiny fraction of what they have, and none of it is exactly shocking reading so far.
Not to mention the fact that they approached the State Department for help with redactions. The State Department blew them off (pretty rudely, IIRC), which officially makes it their problem, not Wikileaks’.
Yep. Hard to see how US Gov thinks it has the right to be pissed about it when they were explicitly given the chance to remove anything damaging from the leaks.
Interesting….I think very few people are aware of this, if it is actually true (which I doubt).
To be fair, almost nobody thinks Assange is a villain for releasing corporate information. That’s never the criticism I’ve heard being lobbed at him.
The article is intended to be more of a joke about Facebook than Wikileaks…..
Time’s Man of the Year isn’t meant to be an honor or award. Hitler was Man of the Year in his time. It’s just simply the person who has had the most influence and buzz during that year.
It’s quite true. It may sound funny, indeed, but this cartoon/irony tells the truth.
Unfortunately, Facebook’s privacy policy reduces our privacy inch by inch, while also delivering our private info to corporations so they can serve ads to us.
I may not totally agree with Mr. Assange’s methods, but given how corporations operate (i.e. lack of transparency etc.) I think what Mr. Assange is doing is helping to preserve our welfare and liberties.
The truth is horrible!
So, you’d rather not know it?
I have to say this debate is one of the most insane debates to gain critical mass. I happen to be one of the individuals in an “evil corporation” that purchases the information about the general public. To be completely honest my collegues nor I have the time to look at any individual information. I and the rest of the Marketing and Advertising community could care less about your personal information. The only thing i am interested in is what at the very least 1000 of you think about a certian product or consumer related subject.
Lastly I should also point out that Facebook is completely free and the company has to fins a way to generate income they can’t exist simply because you think they should. You can always leave the site; this idea that Facebook owes you something even though you provide them nothing of value in return is insane quite frankley.
At any rate take it from one of the peoplr who gets your data; NO CARES ABOUT YOU PERSONALLY. There is no money in you and only you.
This is not really the issue. The issue is that regardless of what you are using the information for or whether or not you care about individual data, that data is aggregated in a database which is vulnerable to hackers. The more corporate databases a person’s personal data resides in, the greater the change that one of them will be broken into, and the information used for identity theft or other illegal purposes.
its double standards of the US government. He has every right to publish any information that he gets just like NY times has the right to. The US constitution allows that. And he cannot possibly be charged (in a fair world) with espionage because he is NOT an american citizen. Espionage needs to be looked up in the dictionary. The entire world is the not play ground of Americans.
He stands for a principal of exposing corrupt regimes and i think it is a good job done. Anyone who believes in fairness and the fact that corruption needs to be exposed should support Assange. It is funny how everyone got bullied into boycotting the poor guy. My American friend called his work “terrorism at its best” i was like are you kidding me? The american media is biased and people are stupid for accepting whatever the media feeds into their puny brains.
Um, no. Not being a US citizen means he can’t be arrested for treason, but espionage would still be fair game.
I’d change “for free” in Julian’s box. Better say “for freedom”
Hay una diferencia entre información privada e información que afecta a la seguridad de un país.
¿De verdad alguien cree que en las guerras solo mueren “los malos”?
La gente tiene que aceptar las guerras con todas sus consecuencias. Lo importante es la voluntad de hacer bien o mal.
Hay una diferencia entre información privada e información que afecta a la seguridad de un país.
Sí, creo que hay una diferencia entre los dos.
¿De verdad alguien cree que en las guerras solo mueren “los malos”?
La gente tiene que aceptar las guerras con todas sus consecuencias. Lo importante es la voluntad de hacer bien o mal.
No, lo importante no es la voluntad de hacer bien ni mal. Lo importante es el bueno o malo hecho.
(with apologies for my amateur mangling of Spanish. It’s not the most familiar language for me, and I have already exhausted nearly all of my vocabulary here.)
Ah, you beat me in showing off you Spanish skills, eh?
I wouldn’t characterize it as either “skill” or “showing off”, given my competency level.
Basically Victor said that there is a difference between private information and information that affects the security of the country. Do you really believe that in war only the bad die? The people have to accept that in all wars there are consequences. What is important is the will to do good or evil.
I think so anyway. I haven’t spoken Spanish in ages.
No he hablado espanol en muy largo vez. Pero es bueno ver a otra espanol hablante aqui. ¿Victor, puedes hablando en ingles solo por favor?
Pero ya ves tu punto. Pero alli son bueno punto contra tu opino. Por ejemplo, como puedemos confiar en gobierno. Quieres confiar en gobierno hasta eso punto?
Man, my Spanish is bad.
Man, my Spanish is bad.
Meh. You’re more fluent than I am- and a lot more idiomatic. The important thing is that I can understand you.
Esperanto, anyone? That I can do.
I’m only now regaining my fluency because I’ve started using a few language learning sites (I don’t want to make a plug, but busuu.com is great for learning languages). I used to be great at it when I was younger, but when I came back to England in 2007 I lost most of it. Now, I’m getting a bit better again; I can follow the news in Spanish and write online, but speaking it in front of people is difficult. Also, is it just me, but when you transition between languages quickly, but do you find it difficult to speak properly in English again?
It depends how long I’ve been immersed in the other language. I don’t transition rapidly very well. The brain is in either one mode or the other; occasionally a little of the syntax transfers over to English after a rapid switch, but that’s probably because I’m still trying to accommodate a foreign speaker. French used to be my best foreign language but I haven’t spoken it in thirty years and do very little reading in it these days. Esperanto is my next best language. After that, we start to leave the realm of languages that I know well enough to actually think in. German, a little bit. Spanish, about the same. I can read a fair amount of Italian and Dutch based on general similarities to their close relatives, but to speak them, write in them, or follow a live conversation is nearly impossible.
You are wrong.
The issue is if sites like Facebook lure you with a promise of privacy (and yes they owe you that much if THEY promise you that) and then break the rules they started the game with.
If you are going to make money out of our private data at least we need fair knowledge of it in order to make informed decisions.
Your argument is lame.
Not entirely sure exactly to who or what this post is referring.
This is what happens when posters don’t realize the awesome and epic utility of the reply button. Use it early and often, folks.
The SNL Video was executed better.
I can’t believe in this day of web awareness, that we still lump things clumsily into “private information” and then use the argument from definition.
Do you all honestly see no difference between secret cables between national ambassadors and my favorite rock band?
omfg!!! great work xddddd
So what you’re saying is…Wikileaks needed Farmville?
It would help if you told us who these people are.
If you’re too out of the loop to spot the people who placed 1st and 2nd for Time magazine’s Person of the Year 2010, that would be your problem, not mine.