Erich M. on Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:33:29 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> moderate conclusions drawn from squire young's letter [WAS:Re: free speech and financialisation]

On 11/25/2011 06:02 PM, John Young wrote:
> "Free speech" has come to mean to protect your wallet for
> that enterpise has been "financialized" by media, academia
> and NGOs -- and whistleblowers, not to overlook
> documentary makers and once honorable alt media. 
> Assange is a courageous and creative person, don't smirk
> at the journo-formulaic cheap shot, but from the beginning 
> he has put fund-raising first on the WL agenda, exaggerated 
> WL uniqueness, overstated (with coy understatement) 
> its influence, and misrepresents WL's inept security. 
> My early critique of those fatal flaws is still valid

'tis true, methinks, companero John et al.  By the end of the "crypto
wars" [end of the nineties] an Australian website sported by far the
best up to date overview of [changing] crypto laws worldwide. Site was
run by a newbie named Julian Assange, funds: apparently none.
EPIC then had already tapped Soros & c funding and produced the best in
depth insight into global crypto laws - but yet mostly on dead trees:
booklets, books, brochures. Within months more of historical value.
During the Wassenaar and the iCrypto campaigns 1998 that marked the end
of the "crypto wars" in EU [except for the Brits] the Australians played
a significant role there.

Afterwards? One would meet Julian now and then at the ccc congresses.
Another gifted and rebellious hacker amongst [hopefully] more,
preferrably astray. Guy like companero Jaromil here on the list.

When they came up with the WL concept you could understand the basic
flaw at a glance: That was in scaling, as always.

- If WL became somewhat moderately successful, possible growth should be
very slow, because funds would be only trickling in, if even so.
Best outcome would be a "cryptome2" with a different geographical focus
and leaking program. Good enough, though.

- if WL really would take off, they'd need money: editors _skilled_ in
publishing leaked doqs. Pretty rare species, indeed. Even for good money.

- After a somewhat unspectacular and therefore regular starting phase -
WL took of. Cash poured in. I have a rough idea about how much during
that phase. Unprecedented for that project but far from spectacular.
Compared to the fundings of some [honoric] US civil liberties orgs: real
starvation rate limited to a year. Future unknown.

- WL could neither cope with the growth in editing requirements - so
they had to take to journalist prominence around the world. High level
talks to the chief editors' offices where yesterdays news are sold on
dead trees. This was the beginning of the end.

- And then the cash flow was shut down. All at sudden.

- All WLs main financing lines were under control of the US. The primary
fallback channel based in Germany, where General von Clausewitz might
have sighed and turned around in his grave. A German bank account.
Blocked by all US and major international online payment systems.

- The only option WL had left was to release truly massive fireworks
finally. All ammunition left at once. V2 style. Spare random and
neglible targets were hit.

Now all is up to the courts in The UK, Sweden and the US.
Bradley Manning and Julian Assange [not mentioned the other harrassed
crew] face "wild west winds" driving "pestilence-stricken multitudes".

Press coverage is fading slowly to level0. The more fading the more the
guys are in danger who had the guts to risk loosing their asses: First
of all Manning, second Assange. We need not worry much about Daniel
Domscheit-Berg. He was last seen here this week in Vienna touring the
wisecrack & higher level panels. ;)

If the only main media news topic worldwide - the economic meltdown -
persists for a while, both of them are doomed. Nobody will care. They

There is such a crowd of worldwide communicators on this list enjoying
access to all kinds of media other than silly fuqbook kampaigns due for
a praecox breakdown.
Analysis is good. Assistance is better under circumstances given.


Erich M.
--... ...--   -.. .   . .-. .. -.-. ....   --- . ...-- . -- -...

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact: