elemenopy

This is a mischaracterisation. If Assange wanted due process, he could leave the embassy and face the British (and then possibly Swedish) court systems. The only person choosing to arbitrarily detain Assange without due process is himself.

Comment · 9 years ago

I disagree: I think there is a reasonable case to hold WikiLeaks and the NYT to different standards. I think WikiLeaks holds itself out as a much more anarchic news organisation than traditional outlets like the NYT. WikiLeaks isn't connected or have allegiance to any particular country, and will publish, let the facts speak for themselves and damn the establishment and any particular national interests that are harmed. On the other hand, organisations like the NYT are pretty open about how while they often publish against the wishes of USG they do ask for comment and may defer publication if they are satisfied there are very good reasons to do so. [1]

Therefore, for WikiLeaks to become highly partisan is a radical departure from their original mission; moreover, it has happened without WikiLeaks acknowledging that this is the case. I think you can't same the same for the NYT.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/public-editor/sullivan-les...

Comment · 9 years ago

In fact Merriam Webster [1] very explicitly advocates for "gauge":

> The verb gauge, which refers to measuring or estimating, also has a variant gage. This variant appears to show up primarily in informal sources, though not often. Gauge is by far the preferred spelling in general usage for both the noun and the verb; we encourage you use it.

1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gage

Comment · 9 years ago

Page 2 (or p. 12 of the PDF):

> In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016.

Comment · 10 years ago

It's still around for some things, eg Jetstar. You used to be able to do a manual online transfer to pay for flights but now POLi is the only way you can avoid the $5 credit card surcharge. Grinds on me every time I buy a flight.

Comment · 10 years ago

You cite Breitbart as an example of a website that is "less vulnerable to being co-opted or politically motivated."

How is that even remotely accurate, considering the Chairman of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, is Trump's campaign chairman?

Comment · 10 years ago

I think "forced means of talent retention" is an unfairly harsh characterisation. It's a pretty reasonable policy considering taxpayers have to service the debt, and people who go overseas stop paying tax. It's all very well to propose a "good socialist system" but if people pay domestic fees and then leave NZ they're essentially getting a free ride and it's the people who don't go to uni who end up paying for it.

Comment · 10 years ago

That's from May last year, when he resigned and then un-resigned after failing to win his seat in the last election.

Of course, possible a similar thing could happen again.

Comment · 10 years ago

They probably use the email address of the registrant of the domain name as the sign-up address for their own website.

Comment · 10 years ago

> it's clear they this leak is planned

But you haven't produced any real evidence for this claim.

The ICIJ has co-ordinated the reporting on the leak, sure; but that's not the same as claiming the leak itself was in bad faith, part of some wider state-sponsored conspiracy from G20 nations, etc.

Comment · 10 years ago

> Real leaks don't have fancy websites with responsive vectorized portraits and a full on content /social media structure.

I don't understand this. Don't newspapers always make stories that they can tell are important more engaging for the reader? Here's a cute Guardian flash interactive from Cablegate, [1] and another nice Washington Post interactive on the same story. [2] Here's a really fancy six-part interactive from the Guardian in the wake of the Snowden files. [3] Whenever the media publishes leaks they will make similar things, even when Western governments act strenuously to prevent publication, as in the case of Cablegate and Snowden.

How does a well-presented story indicate anything other than the media thought this was a story which was important and in the public interest?

1. http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2010/nov/28/us-... 2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/wikileak... 3. http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/sno...