Der unabhängige IT- und Tech-Kanal!
internet.board.entertainment.games.hardware
Daniel Schmitt of WikiLeaks is interviewed by gulli:news. He encourages all readers and warns his opponents - WikiLeaks has the means to make our society better, to create a world which stands united and strong against abuse - locally and nationally as well as globally. Modern, fast, world-wide technology makes it possible. In the interview, Daniel explains in detail how this will be done, with the help of WikiLeaks.
gulli:news: How did you get the idea to start WikiLeaks? Which groups where involved?
Daniel Schmitt: WikiLeaks was created by a group of people who met, for various reasons, at the intersection of technology, human rights, journalism and law, to analyse different observations about our society and create structures which should successfully improve known problems.
The primary conviction of the project, its base, is that the right to free information and communication is an essential part of the right to life and the foundation for successfully living toghether in the information society. Without the possibility to be well-informed, to be able to act when acting is necessary to prevent or correct mistakes in society or its development, without free communication free life is not possible. Particularly since many of our actions nowadays have global consequences.
The conviction that the exchange of information can only happen uncensored and without the possibility to censor it, for and in a healthy society, and that the exchange of information has to be protected, is what basically defines WikiLeaks.
The last point in particular is becoming relevant nowadays when talking about internet censorship, be it here in Germany (censorship declared as "hindering access to child pornography", in Scandinavia or Australia. Censorship is a concept which, no matter what form it will take, will get into the way of our communication of the neutral internet. Just as the surveillance of telephone directory assistance to deny access to drugs would be totally pointless, it's pointless to try preventing the publication of "child porn" by DNS blocks. Not to mention the implications of filtering directory assistance, like personalised advice for advertising purposes.
But our main motivation is much more global: The concept of freedom of information. For only freedom of information allows us to identify and correct abuse in our society. Censorship, for whatever reason and purpose, is directly opposed to that. Free communication is free only until someone defines what is free.
WikiLeaks is a mechanism which opposes and tries to counteract censorship, whereever it occurs, and tries to guarantee a digitally correct and infinite data record for the rights and the history of mankind.
WikiLeaks tries to correct the legally and factually instable state of media, particularly concerning investigative journalism, to protect sources and there material from the claims of third parties, to inform the public without compromise and to found a global information-based alliance.
gulli:news: Do you have a special "philosophy"? If you do, could you please give a brief description?
Daniel Schmitt: "Brief" is a challenge. As I described above, there were realisations about the situation of our world, and the idea was to try and offer solutions for that.
Most developments which harmed and are still harming our society could way too long go on in secret. The more closed, more secret a system is, the more vulnerable it is to abuse and mistakes. No matter if we are talking about a piece of technology, a government or a company. That's one of the reasons why investigative journalism and transparent information flow are of essential meaning for every society, and ours in particular.
To bring to light this abuse in a closed, non-transparent system, we need whistleblowers: People who pass on important information to the public, against their orders and sometimes against their own interests. They are something like a natural mechanism to control problems in a closed society: With the amount of abuse happening in the system, the probability for a brave person acting in the name of moral and in the name of everyone and making the abuse publicly known raises. Those people are an essential part of our society and have to be protected by all means.
Particularly those whistleblowers mustn't be criminalised, as it will happen with the new German law for hindering access to "child pornography", which was passed with the support of, notably, family minister Ursula von der Leyen.
WikiLeaks is a systemic idea which is based on, and puts into practise, this philosophy, to improve and optimise those aspects of a problem complex concerning all of society. Understood as a social problem, implemented with the help of technology.
gulli:news: What exactly is your motivation concerning your project? What is particularly important to you?
Daniel Schmitt: The job of WikiLeaks is to ensure the legally and technically protected retrieval of information from anonymous sources and to make available this information for the general public. The motivation behind this is to make access to socially relevant documents possible for everyone. This allows the media to access and use first-class source material even in times of ongoing budget cuts and the dying out of investigative journalism.
WikiLeaks makes a promise. Our sources can trust us to keep it without compromise. I think our motivation is the keeping of this promise, which has positive aspects all over the world.
Apart from that, working with WikiLeaks causes positive feelings on a daily basis. It is very dynamic and brings you into contact with most diverse contents and contexts. And it is incredibly rewarding to see the daily miracles somewhere in the world which are catalysed here, the courage and the reporting of it, the resistance and the fight against injustice. That's a very powerful mechanism for society and it just has to be supported.
Also, we want to see the platform enhanced for the 1.0 release. We are still in a beta phase in which WikiLeaks shows what might be possible. And the success of the project encourages everyone to let the ghost out of the machine and tap into all ressources available.
gulli:news: Why did you choose the name "WikiLeaks"? What is special about the Wiki concept and how do you use it to achieve your goals?
Daniel Schmitt: The original idea to use a Wiki was related to the goal to establish something like the first public intelligence service. A system in which lots of citizens can involve themselves in all the material WikiLeaks can make available in a way which makes possible something like an "Open Source Intelligence Community", opposing the global abuse in our world as a community of global, well-informed citizens.
At least in this context reality has caught up with WikiLeaks a bit. Most interested people only find out about documents reading a story on, for example, Gulli. And there are still too few people who understand the power of those documents for our global and local political and social interests. For a global alliance of well-informed citizens.
However, we think this is at least partly due to the publication and, in particular, the sub-optimal presentation of WikiLeaks in the MediaWiki. We haven't given up hope about this. Release 1.0 will solve this problem.
Our notoriety grows steadily, thanks to, among others, Twitter. A better interface and a platform better suiting our needs in release 1.0 will certainly contribute to increasing the efficience of our work for everyone on the Internet. This will involve more aspects than just the Wiki and, apart from allowing for discussions, the Wiki isn't really a good base for our platform. And discussions could be realized much better using the Reddit software than in the Wiki.
gulli:news: How do you finance your project; does that only happen by collecting donations?
Daniel Schmitt: It is difficult to make a statement about the financing of our project. Firstly, one should really divide it into the operational versus the content-related part. The operational part, that is, the maintaining of our infrastructure, is completely independent from the content-related part and is financed in a completely different way. This mostly happens through people who provide the project with rackspace, electricity and bandwidth. Since the project is flexible about server capacities, demand can be tailored to fit what volunteers can offer the project. That scales quite well but it's hard to express in monetary figures. For that, you would probably have to have someone in a central position to know how many servers exactly we have standing in which place.
As for the content-related part, that is mainly taken care of by people who use their time and their personal resources to help the platform. Be it by checking documents, taking care of press relations or simply keeping the Wiki tidy. All that is hard to quantify. How much money would my time be worth, right now, to answer the Gulli readers' questions, if I could bill the project for it? Maybe one could work that out, but nobody has time for that really.
We get donations, yes, and a significant part comes from Germany. Thanks a lot for that! The donations help us to pay at least some expenses the project has, like buying hardware or similar things. The problem with this is that, unfortunately, individual donations are hard to plan in advance and often depend on a new hot document or story.
We are right now busy putting the WikiLeaks finances on a better base, for which we apply by some big foundations whose goals of supporting investigative journalism or fighting corruption and injustice are exactly what we try to achieve. And we've been very successful at it, so I'm optimistic.
As for the situation of our financial support, we now have the possibility to have our work supported by the Wau Holland Foundation which supports moral courage, freedom of information and media history. So, as with, for example, the TOR project for Europe, donations can be made to the foundation and used according to purpose by us. That is an enormous step for us; we are very happy and grateful that the Wau Holland Foundation decided to support us, to show solidarity with us.
gulli:news: How is the fact-checking of new content done?
Daniel Schmitt: The way we check is different with each document, therefore this question is difficult to answer. There are really three areas in which checking is done: The technical part, the content and the context. In those areas we have people who are experienced in checking documents and can reach according conclusions. Since every document has its own history, technically and considering its contents and context, this checking process is always unique and involves different experts.
As with the other jobs this is done by people who have a good reputation for what they do and are willing, at the moment, to help us in most cases without pay. On the other hand, this work makes it possible to work in a very pleasant environment in which people with lots of competence and a deep belief in the right to information come toghether. Independently of own interests and only in the criteria for documents defined by the projects.
We do not check the contets of the documents in the way of making a jugdement, for example by criteria of law or content. This is not possible and neither is it desirable in the context of our promise to our sources, so we do not regard this as a part of fact-checking. WikiLeaks publishes.
gulli:news: Was there a case which showed the significance of WikiLeaks particularly well?
Daniel Schmitt: What WikiLeaks does has effects on so many levels that there a lots of examples. There are examples of local effects, where "small miracles" were reached and we help people and their interests directly. Those are single cases which are difficult to compare to 3,000,000,000 Dollars in corruption money, hundreds of millions that were hidden from taxes, the Guantanamo handbooks, political assassinations in Kenya and East Timor, corruption in the EU parliament or similar things. But they all have their merit and stand witness of abuse and, more and more, of justice reached in our society.
What's interesting is the way it works:
* The publication of documents from the Barclay Bank in England, which were about a very huge network of companies to clandestinely get money out of the bank, was forbidden to the Guardian newspaper. The documents had to be removed from the online presence at once. The next day, the information that WikiLeaks had published the documents had to be removed. Only by explicitely mentioning the WL publication in the British parliament made it possible for the press, under parliamentary privilege, to inform the British public of the document.
* The publication of, presumably, almost the whole works of Scientology and their shying away from taking legal measures, perhaps in consequence of the failure of the Swiss Julius Baer Bank, is just as interesting. Concerning Scientology you should be able to find all original material you need to expose the cult as that what it really is here.
* Our publication of more than 6500 Congressional Research Service Reports from the US Congress which are nowadays even hosted by US government agencies. An example for active help by government transparency in the own government.
Countless developments all across the globe on all levels of our lives.
The principles by which this works are as complex as society is diverse. Countless things happen all over the world. And very interesting dynamics develop, including here in Germany, with a very big and very active extra-parliamentary and bipartisan opposition against the censorship law passed by the CSU and its partner in crime, the SPD. An extra-parliamentary opposition which has very much power and a very powerful voice if it knows how to make use of it in the near future.
And all that, apart from many social factors, because those people could be informed by WikiLeaks. This topic in particular shows us how important and open, transparent and competent debate about every subject, and here the subject of controlling the Internet and our communication, is and how publishing current, non-public information can contribute to that. It allows influencing and criticising the ongoing political process by making it transparent.
gulli:news: At the moment there is a tendency towards stricter and stricter limitations to freedom in the Internet. Many internet users fear that WikiLeaks, too, might one day be threatened by a block or takedown. Have you taken precautions against that? If you have, what do they look like? Have you created a special infrastructure which makes this kind of thing harder or impossible? Would you take legal action against being blocked?
WikiLeaks is a globally recognized project for the protection of human rights and our right to information. Amnesty International, the Economist and Ars Electronica have awarded prizes to the project.
WikiLeaks is a public platform which made possible more than 85,000 publications in the global press and has developed a value and a meaning in the society which goes well beyond publishing Internet block lists. This could be defined as starting point for negotiations.
You don't try to censor WikiLeaks. Not if you are in any way interested in freedom, morals and justice and if you have understood the value of information for society in the information society.
The new law includes criminalising the source of information as well as the publishing of information in the free press. This is completely unacceptable and a very important part of the problem. Exposing abuse in the system must be possible in society and for free press. And someone who hasn't even thought of that hasn't thought very far indeed. WikiLeaks was planned and created to oppose the desires of censors and action against WikiLeaks, no matter if it's technical or legal, will be dealt with accordingly. The planned net censorship law is a bad attempt which will pathetically fail in reality. Without the demand for much action from any side. Legally as well as technically there are countless weaknesses.
Just like the Internet WikiLeaks routes around problems with this kind of attack on press freedom. And just like that society will maneuvre around the problem and eliminate it.
However, WikiLeaks also takes action against attacks on its publications or its sources. We have good legal support, you mustn't forget that. And, here as well, it also works over alliances. Over people with shared interests who form alliances in the moment when they're needed. Alliances of wonderful lawyers who help us directly, the many international societies supporting the press and their wonderful lawyers, human rights and anti-corruption organisations and many others. Alliances with the public, solidarity and mobilisation.
Where we as society need an alliance, against the violation of human rights, corruption, war, torture and abuse, and their censorship, we form one.
gulli:news: How do you deal with the risk that WikiLeaks might be abused to spread a third party's propaganda? How do you protect yourself from this kind of abuse?
Daniel Schmitt: We'll see about that one if it happens.
gulli:news: What are your plans for the future and how are you planning to realize them?
Daniel Schmitt: Our plans for the future all aim directly at the version 1.0 release. This will mean a certain amount of work in different areas. From the technical point of view, infrastructure has to be bought and assembled, all kinds of things have to be programmed, and so on.
As for the content-related things, we need a new interface which has to be designed and implemented and we need translations for certain parts of the platform so that basic information is important in as many native languages as possible.
We are considering making people sponsors for servers, so that people who want to get involved can help us with donations for hosting to build up a global infrastructure which can withstand future censorship and control on very many levels. We have routines for most problems on both the legal and technical level and we hope that we can win as many people as possible for this alliance.
The two questions which arise are, firstly, to which extent we will find organisations to help with our financing and, secondly, to which extent we can mobilise the public for the next stage of our project. A healthy mix would be ideal, I think.
We have many more ideas which are realistic and helpful to our goals and which we would like to implement as "features" for society. We have shown that we can do so successfully and we hope that we can win the trust and support of the world to an even bigger extent.
gulli:news: Which role do you see for WikiLeaks in future social development?
Daniel Schmitt: We see the project's accomplishments as an important mechanism to maintain our society's integrity and the integrity of its data and, therefore, our history. As Orwell said, whoever controls the past controls the future. We have to guarantee the integrity of information in our society.
This problem complex, too, forbids censorship on a basic level. What is, is. And it has to be made sure that it is recorded in history just as it is: This would be the beginning of the real information society and its potential to make right decisions in the future.
Expectations about our project are very high and coming from different people, and it will be a lot of work to even come close to using the potential there is. But what we are planning for the long term will be built for eternity.
There are clear-cut ideas about how to establish important mechanisms in a simple and durable way, and we hope we'll see as many of those established as possible.
Since WikiLeaks interacts with society in many different ways there is an enourmous potential to cover the reality in our society. And all of us, no matter if we're well-informed citizens, bloggers, lawyers or academics, journalists or activists accessing this data, can actively help making our society's future development more reasonable. Based on good decisions and a lobby of people informed by documentation.
An ongoing process is always best to influence by citing hard facts; that's preventive and at least prevents the worst damage. Then, the rest is only a question of timing and of implementing the WikiLeaks mechanism on the broadest possible level in society. And I'm optimistic about that.
And again, current development in Germany is extremely important. As I said, at the moment we have this great lobby which has realized that it has a voice if it wants one. And if all of that is used correctly, and we hope we can contribute to that, there is a potential for reformation.
In the medium- to long-term perspective the release 1.0 plays a very important role, and at the moment, that is the main focus of our project. Our plans for being unable to censor and for free communication are diverse and will help society on many more levels.
Sometime in the future we will probably attempt to be recognized by the United Nations; they are, after all, using our published material successfully already. And maybe we can establish WikiLeaks servers in embassy rooms.
gulli:news: What kind of support are you hoping for for your future work?
Daniel Schmitt: We need support when it really counts. Unfortunately, many events concerning WikiLeaks are difficult to plan and very spontaneous.
On the one hand there is political support, the solidarity of society against the problems uncovered by WikiLeaks and the attempt to censor them.
In the context of the latest developments in a complex context and the necessary political support for a certain cause, we are considering marking certain Tweets with a hashtag for emergencies which signifies that it has to do with something very important which needs the world's attention. #EMERGENCY or something like that. We have to try and make sure that dramatic developments in the world get the necessary attention.
To better establish structural support, we hope that, for example, the sponsorship idea is received well. In addition to that, the Wau Holland Foundation now gives us another possibility to get support, particularly in Germany, but also in Europe and all over the world.
Ideally, we soon want to be able to support 10 people in an office to optimse work on the project development and release 1.0. One idea would be to do it here in Berlin, which I, personally, would like very much, but that's a financing question.
gulli:news: Is there anything else you want to tell our readers?
Daniel Schmitt: Taking everything into account, I want to remind everyone that our society has the means to be informed and to tackle the problems at hand, sometimes even prevent them.
We must never forget this. We have the means to make our society better, to form a world in which there is a strong and united opposition against abuse. Locally, nationally, globally.
All it costs us is our awareness and the decision to stand united in important questions which concern everyone on the planet and the quality of all our lives.
Alexander Solschenizyn put it very well in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Price in 1972: Rescue of humankind is possible if everything is everyone's business.
That's the real information society.
(The interview was conducted by Annika Kremer)
News Redaktion am Sonntag, 05.07.2009 22:16 Uhr
Tags:
informationsfreiheit
informationsgesellschaft
information
menschenrechte
interview
schmitt
zensur
zensursula
netzsperre
wikileaks
Surprisingly, some of the people there are very critical towards WikiLeaks, saying that their philsophy endangers peoples' privacy, company secrets and also the lives of people in the military. What do you think about this? ...
Loads of comments at slashdot.org ! (right now more than 100 !) ...
Daniel Schmitt of the whistleblowing site WikiLeaks agreed to be interviewed by gulli:news. Daniel Schmitt of WikiLeaks is interviewed by gulli:news. He encourages all readers and warns his opponents - WikiLeaks has the means to make our society better, to create a world which stands united ...
Lars Sobiraj am 20.05.2012, 16:54 Uhr
Im US-amerikanischen iTunes Store wurden statt dem Begriff "Jailbreak" lediglich Sternchen zwischen dem Anfangs- und Endbuchstaben angezeigt. Davon waren letztlich alle Kategorien betroffen. So wurden neben Apps auch Klingeltöne, Podcasts, Musikstücke, ganze Alben und eBooks zensiert angezeigt. Laut den Untersuchungen von Shoutpedia waren mehrere Monate lang 95% aller Begriffe davon betroffen.
Kämpfe als Held in diesem einzigartigen Fantasy Game. Viele Gefahren und Abenteuer erwarten dich! 
spielen
Erschaffe deine eigene Insel und erobere die Welt. Krieg oder Wachstum - deine Strategie entscheidet! spielen
Werde Gladiator und kämpfe im antiken Zeitalter um Ruhm und Ehre. Gehe Bündnisse mit anderen Spielern ein und kämpft gemeinsam gegen die schrecklichen Barbaren. spielen
Ziehe als einsamer Waldläufer oder an der Seite von Kampfgefährten in einem Fantasy-Spiel von Abenteuer zu Abenteuer. spielen
Tritt gegen legendären Samurai aus Japan des 19. Jahrhundert an und werde der gefürchtetste aller Samurai. spielen
Tritt in eine epische Schlacht zwischen Werwölfen und Vampiren, in der nur die Stärksten überleben werden, ein. spielen
