I'm sure it does have everything to do with it.

It was alluded to earlier, but here's the link (from October 9, 2009). I guess nobody reads Computerworld. ;-)

http://www.computerw...b_a_leakier_place

[...]

"It's counterintuitive," he said. "You'd think the bigger and more important the document is, the more likely it will be reported on but that's absolutely not true. It's about supply and demand. Zero supply equals high demand, it has value. As soon as we release the material, the supply goes to infinity, so the perceived value goes to zero."

The final act will be for Wikileaks to publish the material on its Web site after the story has been written and the embargo period lapsed.

"We want to get as much substantive information as possible into the historical record, keep it accessible and provide incentives for people to turn it into something that will achieve political reform," said Assange.

Wikileaks is also working on ways to make browsing throu[g]h the material it receives easier for users.

Wikileaks often runs into problems concerning how to present material and how to make it easier to sift through for vital information, said Assange.

"At the moment, for example, we are sitting on 5GB from Bank of America, one of the executive's hard drives," he said. "Now how do we present that? It's a difficult problem. We could just dump it all into one giant Zip file, but we know for a fact that has limited impact. To have impact, it needs to be easy for people to dive in and search it and get something out of it."

In three years on the Web, Wikileaks published over 1.2 million sensitive documents.

The way things have turned out with the State cables, it sort-of proves the first paragraph, doesn't it? I think the story turned with the sex allegations, not the bank stuff.

FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.

Post #336,986 by folkert 12/9/10 7:40:31 AM Reply	I'm sure it does have everything to do with it. As soon as the announcement was a Major Bank... all heck broke loose on WikiLeaks. And the focus was shifted to the US Cables.
Post #336,987 by Another Scott 12/9/10 7:51:08 AM Reply	Dunno. Assange said he had bank stuff last year. It was alluded to earlier, but here's the link (from October 9, 2009). I guess nobody reads Computerworld. ;-) http://www.computerw...b_a_leakier_place [...] "It's counterintuitive," he said. "You'd think the bigger and more important the document is, the more likely it will be reported on but that's absolutely not true. It's about supply and demand. Zero supply equals high demand, it has value. As soon as we release the material, the supply goes to infinity, so the perceived value goes to zero." The final act will be for Wikileaks to publish the material on its Web site after the story has been written and the embargo period lapsed. "We want to get as much substantive information as possible into the historical record, keep it accessible and provide incentives for people to turn it into something that will achieve political reform," said Assange. Wikileaks is also working on ways to make browsing throu[g]h the material it receives easier for users. Wikileaks often runs into problems concerning how to present material and how to make it easier to sift through for vital information, said Assange. "At the moment, for example, we are sitting on 5GB from Bank of America, one of the executive's hard drives," he said. "Now how do we present that? It's a difficult problem. We could just dump it all into one giant Zip file, but we know for a fact that has limited impact. To have impact, it needs to be easy for people to dive in and search it and get something out of it." In three years on the Web, Wikileaks published over 1.2 million sensitive documents. The way things have turned out with the State cables, it sort-of proves the first paragraph, doesn't it? I think the story turned with the sex allegations, not the bank stuff. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
Post #336,988 by drook 12/9/10 8:50:22 AM Reply	In 2009 did bank any execs even know what a "Wikileak" was? Last year Wikileaks stories were in Computerworld. This year they're in the Wall Street Journal. Not surprising they noticed it this time. -- Drew
Post #336,989 by jake123 12/9/10 9:31:33 AM Reply	Yeah, Assange and wikileaks are actually being really smart The simple truth is that it's become very apparent to any and everyone who's paying attention just who the people within our governments really work for... and that this is the case all across the western nations. 100%.

Welcome to IWETHEY!