{"id":1246,"date":"2010-12-09T13:43:01","date_gmt":"2010-12-09T18:43:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/legalbytes.ignite.lexblog.com\/2010\/12\/imho-wiki-wiki-true-to-its-meaning\/"},"modified":"2022-04-28T20:32:13","modified_gmt":"2022-04-28T20:32:13","slug":"imho-wiki-wiki-true-to-its-meaning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/legalbytes.com\/2010\/12\/09\/imho-wiki-wiki-true-to-its-meaning\/","title":{"rendered":"IMHO – Wiki Wiki True to Its Meaning"},"content":{"rendered":"

According to Tech Terms<\/a>, “wiki” comes from the Hawaiian phrase “wiki wiki,” which means “super fast.”\u00a0I guess if you have thousands of users launching denial of service attacks (see below) against targeted web sites \u2013 well “super fast” spells super trouble.\u00a0Which has prompted me to write this article “IMHO” (in my humble opinion) \u2013 IMHO being a social media nod to the kewl gnu<\/i> SMS lingo.<\/p>\n

So, doesn\u2019t it seem as if this WikiLeaks<\/a> thing has gotten out of hand?\u00a0Now in fairness, in my view there are intelligent points being made on both sides of the issues \u2013 national security is important; so is freedom of the press and speech.\u00a0There are also rights and responsibilities on both sides of the issues \u2013 private censorship is not something that sits well with those of us who value the right to hear and voice differing opinions and thoughts; yet using a “free speech” argument to allow someone to scream fire in a crowded theatre \u2013 even when none exists – can cause harm to innocent people and is, again in my view, irresponsible, if not illegal.<\/p>\n

So if you have been following this Wikileaks issue<\/a>, you already know about the leak of U.S. diplomatic cables by or through WikiLeaks, and unless you have been living under a rock, you have also noticed the arrest of WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.\u00a0All of this has resulted in a dramatic and well-publicized series of “cyber attacks” from “hacktivists” primarily using a disruptive technique known as “denial of service attacks<\/a>.”<\/p>\n

Curiously, the arrest of Mr. Assange in London has nothing to do with the current controversy over confidential and sensitive material that is giving rise to the tensions across the Internet. Mr.\u00a0Assange’s legal problems stem from an international warrant issued by Sweden, where he is accused of rape, molestation and unlawful coercion by two women in connection with sexual encounters he reportedly had while he was in Sweden last summer. Mr. Assange apparently confirmed the encounters, he has denied the allegations of assault, and he has not yet been formally charged in either of the women\u2019s cases.<\/p>\n

The disruptions on the Internet and outcry against his treatment (or the treatment of his company) are not about his personal problems, but rather have taken on a life of their own as a poster child for the principle of “information needs to be free.”\u00a0Somehow, WikiLeaks has become a symbol, a rallying cry, for the cause of free speech and information transparency, being championed by activists around the world, the activities of some of whom has allegedly already resulted in:<\/p>\n