See? Transparency is absolutely critical, just not for them. If they were transparent, perhaps few people would pay attention to them.
I think you are somewhat misguided as how 'whistle blowing' works. The deal is this: If you tell a whistle blowing organisation something that you feel the public needs to know, but you can't tell them directly because you fear for your job/life/whatever they will never give even a hint as to where the information came from.
If any organisation that wants to help people blow the whistle on anything DOES give up this information it loses all credibility to anyone else who was considering releasing information for the public good.
So contrary to your thesis a lack of transparency is essential to wikileaks operation.
It's a perfectly nice place to visit, ... *snip*
Funny.. that's how it feels living in the United States
Given the retarded security the US has put in place with travel most people I speak with attempt to avoid even visiting. It's seen as a nasty chore to vist the states now, not something to look foward to.
Well you obviously have it all thought through. If someone points out that the country you are living in is doing something that looks ridiculous to the rest of the world the answer is to go somewhere else where it isn't pointed out.
Actually, whether the medical concerns are big or small is important to this argument. If the risk is small they can claim the gain outweighs the risk. If the risk is large, they can't. I recall someone doing the math using the TSAs radiation numbers on the increased risk of cancer due to a single dose of one of these scanners. They then compared it to the risk of being killed by terrorist action on any given aircraft flight. The numbers were approximately the same, so (if the math was right) effectivly the TSA, at optimistic estimate, is doubleing the chance of death from a single aircraft flight.
I am sad I cannot recall the source to double check the numbers, but if anyone else wanted to start over with the math I would be very interested.
imagine terrorist hackers who modify the firmware to increase the radiation levels
Wow.. that's a fantastic level of evil. Didn't they say all the images are reviewed remotely? Meaning it's plugged into a network. Forget intercepting drone surveillance, Osama Bin Laden can now kill Americans without leaving Afghanistan. Thanks TSA
I asked wolfram alpha (the source of all maths) and it didn't know that far back. However if the 30,000 acts is correct, and the average size of an act is more than one (probable :) ), then more musicians are employed than were in the low point at 2006. I suspect the average size of an act is more like 2.5 so that would make more musicians employed than the 2001 in peak of the stats wolfram alpha knows of.
Listening to This Week in Tech on the way to work this morning they (admittedly by quoting another source who I can't remeber) made the same point. The entire framing of the movie was off.
The comparison they made was of a skilled English playwright in writing about the Americas during its independence. It would all be framed in from the old world view, and while still being a good piece of art.. would often miss the point.
By my maths with 42 million internet users it will take about two years, three months at 50,000 per day to send a takedown to every internet user in france. However I'll bet that there are far less connections than there are users. So mabey 6 months to get one to every internet connection, and 2 years to get everyone banned.
I expect that this rate of notice publication is going to backfire very badly for the french government.