[ExI] the ambiguously evil british have leaked julian assange's address

[Ryan Rawson]

Kind of different, one is court documents regarding a private
individual, the other is bureaucratic documents about government
officials.   I think it's possible to believe in governmental
transparency and privacy rights for individuals without being
hypocritical.

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:30 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
> "...WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange tried to hide his bail address from the
> public in an astonishing move for the man responsible for leaking thousands
> of diplomatic secrets..."
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1338832/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-ask
> ed-judge-bail-address-secret.html
>
> Wait a minute, this isn't a good thing.  It is only good when the privacy of
> the bad guy is violated.  When the good guy's privacy is subjected to
> involuntary transparency, then is a bad thing, ja?  When the guy who
> de-closeted the bad guy is himself thrown out of the closet, then we need to
> determine who is the good guy and who is the bad guy, in order to decide if
> privacy is a good thing or a bad thing.
>
> Who is evil in this case, the British judge or Assange?  What if some
> bastard had leaked Julian's address to Wikileaks, and Julian didn't notice
> it was in there, mixed with a ream of other text, so he accidentally outed
> himself against his own will?  Then is he good or bad?  This determines if
> he deserves his privacy or needs the disinfectant of sunlight.
>
> Of course we don't know if the address is real or a clever diversionary
> tactic.
>
> Oh this is fun.  {8^D
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>