I'm basically done with defending WikiLeaks as well, after the shit they pulled with the leaks of Turkish data. Completely irresponsible, that one.

However, WikiLeaks doesn't need credibility -- the data does. And the data they published vis-á-vis Clinton/Podesta/DNC is, as of now, solid. There was one fake document, but that was shown to have been injected by someone other than WL.

"Strong bias" -- oh, I do have a strong bias. Plural, as in biases, actually. For instance, I'm disinclined to take anything the US intelligence agencies say at face value, given how they manufactured more than one casus belli. I don't put much weight into (un-)official statements in general, but especially since all the misinformation they spread about issues like the coup in Honduras or the actions of Nazi militias in Ukraine.

In this particular case, however, my argument is much simpler: Occam's razor seems much more likely than malicious intent. Propaganda outlets on both sides are run by people. Maybe the propaganda outlet Sputnik intentionally twisted the content of email, or maybe they just fucked up, like people are wont to do. Maybe someone intentionally fed Trump this bad info, maybe his people are just as incompetent as he is.

There are too many parts in this that include people who have more than once proven themselves to be utterly incompetent, or in complete ignorance of even the concept of truth. I don't think Trump gives a shit about truth or facts, he strikes me as the typical blowhard who spouts whatever shit comes to mind, and spins stories on the fly like a 4-year-old when caught red-handing.

No need for a conspiracy there, with all this incompetence, naiveté and plain disregard for facts.

So when they keep on pushing the Russian angle in this, it just seems like a desperate attempt to conjure up the old unifying enemy. Why worry about Russian propaganda when there's plenty on FOX and MSNBC/CNN? Why worry about Russian hackers when you accept the unbelievably insecure method of eletronic votes, partly without paper trails, and completely controlled by private companies?

It's just very strange to an outsider like me to see them focus on perceived external influences when the internals are a complete clusterfuck. And this presidential election is the biggest clusterfuck I've seen in 30 years, which doesn't mean much, admittedly.

That said, we can't just be looking at it from the outside with binoculars, not when people are back to full-blown Cold War rhetoric. When the ruling class in the US and/or the ruling class in Russia start their pissing contests and other forms of grandstanding, it's usually brown people who pay the price, like they have been in Syria for the last couple of years. And Libya. And Yemen. And Somalia. And Afghanistan, And Iraq. And Pakistan.

Personally, all the rhetoric about "standing up to Russian aggression" and similar nonsense makes me keenly aware that the bridge just outside my hometown was constructed with a shaft to place explosives in, to slow down advancing Soviet troops... so yes, I would very much like to bitch-slap all these warmongerers on both sides, but particularly the ones in the US since they are currently the ones racking up the highest death toll.

Edit: I should have made it clearer. Yes, WL is absolutely biased against Clinton and they do seem to act in support of Trump. Assange in particular. Which bums me out to no end, since I actually met the guy in person when they presented WL at the 26C3.

SPIEGEL: It would surely have been a deterrence for other sources. But most of the journalists insist on being independent and objective. They also like to stress that they are not political activists.

Assange: All they show is that they are activists for the way things are.

Even after being locked in a hole for years, Julian is as sharp as ever. It's been almost 6 years since I met him at the 26C3... maybe he'll be out by the time 40C3 comes around.

It's a hacking convention, basically. I've been attending since the 26C3, the very year that Assange and Domscheit-Berg introduced WikiLeaks 1.0.

Up until this year, very few people outside the community cared about the topics that were discussed. Snowden really lifted attendence and media attention to new heights, even though the public still doesn't care about some crucial topics such as the vulnerability of mobile networks or an entire host of topics about the pitiful state of affairs in Germany.

Speaking of, you're really missing out on the most entertaining events of the entire congress. They always provide a real time translation, but I'm not sure if any stream dumps include the additional audio track.

Just two examples:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XB71MzDrdE
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to48QrlodDI

The first talk details how Germany was the most densely monitored country in history, at least from '49 to '90. Every phone call logged, every piece of mail scanned by the US, the UK or France. This includes everything coming from or going to East Germany. Ironically, the most important station for the monitoring of intra-German mail now hosts Amazon's largest distribution center in Europe.

The second talk is quite simply the greatest review of 2013 from a nerd's perspective.

Edit: yikes, this was supposed to be much shorter.