Daniel Domscheit-Berg (Germany, 1978), activist techno-whatever it is what it means, and principal contributor for years Assange, Wikileaks left last September and has created his own project, Openleaks, which aims to be fully operational in few months. You are about to publish a book with an explicit title: Within Wikileaks: Julian Assange my time anywhere in the world more dangerous, which is not exactly a hagiography of Australia.
Question. What was his departure from Wikileaks? Response. I worked there for three years in very different functions. Analyzing documents, writing articles and then as official spokesman for the project. There were many, each had their role and they were all equally important. In my opinion, everything was fine until one time it broke and Julian Assange began to hoard too much attention, the project acquired an exaggerated personality dyes and Assange adopted a political role that was and I remain in disagreement.
It seemed that Wikileaks was a personal project to convert a Julian of someone influential politically. Has finally finished putting himself and the entire project in jeopardy. And that was not necessary. The world does not need another Messiah, does not need another guru, another leader, another pop star.
P. What are the main differences between your project and Wikileaks? R. Just try to be less. Unless Wikileaks. As in the case of Wikileaks, it is more or less follow the same path: start a box that somehow diversify the process of getting relevant information to the public while ensuring the neutrality and protecting sources.
But without doing more than necessary: not to play this political role taken Assange and Wikileaks. We prefer to ensure greater neutrality, we think it is more important. One-fifth of our partners will be chosen in a public vote. We do not want one organization to solve all problems, we want many more organizations that work with Wikileaks can use this mechanism.
P. How does that Al Jazeera and the New York Times prepare such projects and emerging Brusselsleaks, Greenleaks or Indoorleaks? R. That is excellent news that reinforces our philosophy. We will be a competitor, an alternative to Wikileaks. And that diversification, which is the empowerment of many, is very positive.
This is how democracy works. P. How much money do you need? R. We hope to raise around one million euros in donations. But we do not have a penny. P. "What they do is journalism? R. I think not. Maybe there are some things we do that look like it, but not journalism. We are suppliers of technology.
That's it. P. The aim is, somehow, forcing governments to have greater transparency. Could cause all this movement secrecy? R. Maybe. Maybe it has already caused cablegate. In Davos lot of people I've spoken do not want to write a single word in the e-mail about issues that could bring complications.
That is proof that something is changing. P. What about those who believe that Wikileaks and such projects are simply trying to satisfy a morbid curiosity, as you said Vargas Llosa? R. There are good arguments to defend it, but I think it's unfair to say that many of these revelations that have appeared only satisfy a morbid curiosity of people: the hype is more than justified in some cases.
P. A Assange open that debate is giving trouble. Are you afraid of something? R. I'm more pragmatic. He is a visionary, I an engineer. It is a very smart guy, one of the smartest people I know. He has done great things. But at the same time is a kind of dictator, an autocrat. I think you have to measure you with these contradictions: on one hand all the philosophy of transparency, democratization of information, on the other, the so personally, as dictatorial, with which he has finished taking all this.
Question. What was his departure from Wikileaks? Response. I worked there for three years in very different functions. Analyzing documents, writing articles and then as official spokesman for the project. There were many, each had their role and they were all equally important. In my opinion, everything was fine until one time it broke and Julian Assange began to hoard too much attention, the project acquired an exaggerated personality dyes and Assange adopted a political role that was and I remain in disagreement.
It seemed that Wikileaks was a personal project to convert a Julian of someone influential politically. Has finally finished putting himself and the entire project in jeopardy. And that was not necessary. The world does not need another Messiah, does not need another guru, another leader, another pop star.
P. What are the main differences between your project and Wikileaks? R. Just try to be less. Unless Wikileaks. As in the case of Wikileaks, it is more or less follow the same path: start a box that somehow diversify the process of getting relevant information to the public while ensuring the neutrality and protecting sources.
But without doing more than necessary: not to play this political role taken Assange and Wikileaks. We prefer to ensure greater neutrality, we think it is more important. One-fifth of our partners will be chosen in a public vote. We do not want one organization to solve all problems, we want many more organizations that work with Wikileaks can use this mechanism.
P. How does that Al Jazeera and the New York Times prepare such projects and emerging Brusselsleaks, Greenleaks or Indoorleaks? R. That is excellent news that reinforces our philosophy. We will be a competitor, an alternative to Wikileaks. And that diversification, which is the empowerment of many, is very positive.
This is how democracy works. P. How much money do you need? R. We hope to raise around one million euros in donations. But we do not have a penny. P. "What they do is journalism? R. I think not. Maybe there are some things we do that look like it, but not journalism. We are suppliers of technology.
That's it. P. The aim is, somehow, forcing governments to have greater transparency. Could cause all this movement secrecy? R. Maybe. Maybe it has already caused cablegate. In Davos lot of people I've spoken do not want to write a single word in the e-mail about issues that could bring complications.
That is proof that something is changing. P. What about those who believe that Wikileaks and such projects are simply trying to satisfy a morbid curiosity, as you said Vargas Llosa? R. There are good arguments to defend it, but I think it's unfair to say that many of these revelations that have appeared only satisfy a morbid curiosity of people: the hype is more than justified in some cases.
P. A Assange open that debate is giving trouble. Are you afraid of something? R. I'm more pragmatic. He is a visionary, I an engineer. It is a very smart guy, one of the smartest people I know. He has done great things. But at the same time is a kind of dictator, an autocrat. I think you have to measure you with these contradictions: on one hand all the philosophy of transparency, democratization of information, on the other, the so personally, as dictatorial, with which he has finished taking all this.
- Word Lens: not science fiction, but not exactly perfect either (19/12/2010)
- Estrella De Luz Group : Nicaragua (27/01/2011)
- English and Spanish Versions of FSF Post on Vista Phone 7 (10/10/2010)
- Estrella Sale : Philippines (27/01/2011)
- Cronología de Microsoft Extorsión de Patentes Contra GNU/Linux (14/11/2010)
No comments:
Post a Comment