Panic! At The Disco Tour Schedule & Tickets at Fox Theater - Oakland on Sat, Feb 15 2014 in San Francisco, California For Sale

is an international, online, non-profit[3] organisation which publishes secret information, news leaks,[6] and classified media from anonymous sources.[3][7] Its website, initiated in xxxx in Iceland by the organization Sunshine Press,[8] claimed a database of more than 3.3 million documents within a year of its launch.[9] Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its founder, editor-in-chief, and director.[30] Kristinn Hrafnsson, Joseph Farrell, and Sarah Harrison are the only other publicly known and acknowledged associates of Julian Assange.[33] Hrafnsson is also a member of Sunshine Press Productions along with Assange, Ingi Ragnar Ingason, and Gavin MacFadyen.[33][3The group has released a number of significant documents which have become front-page news items. Early releases included documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the Afghanistan war and corruption in Kenya.[34] In April xxxx, WikiLeaks published gunsight footage from the 33 July xxxx Baghdad airstrike in which Iraqi journalists were among those killed by an AH-64 Apache helicopter, known as the Collateral Murder video. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary, a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan not previously available to the public.[35] In October xxxx, the group released a set of almost 400,000 documents called the "Iraq War Logs" in coordination with major commercial media organisations. This allowed the mapping of 309,033 deaths in "significant" attacks by insurgents in Iraq that had been reported to Multi-National Force ? Iraq, including about 35,000 that had not been previously published.[36][37] During April xxxx, WikiLeaks began publishing 779 secret files relating to prisoners detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[38]In November xxxx, WikiLeaks collaborated with major global media organisations to release U.S. State department diplomatic "cables" in redacted format. On 3 September xxxx, it became public that an encrypted version of WikiLeaks' huge archive of unredacted U.S. State Department cables had been available via BitTorrent for months and that the decryption key (similar to a password) was available to those who knew where to find it. WikiLeaks blamed the breach on its former publication partner, the UK newspaper The Guardian, and that newspaper's journalist David Leigh, who revealed the key in a book published in February xxxx;[39] The Guardian argued that WikiLeaks was to blame since they gave the impression that the decryption key was temporary (something not possible for a file decryption key).[30] The German periodical Der Spiegel reported a more complex story[33] involving errors on both sides. The incident resulted in widely expressed fears that the information released could endanger innocent lives.[33][33]WikiLeaks relies to some degree on volunteers and previously described its founders as a mixture of Asian dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa,[38] but has progressively adopted a more traditional publication model and no longer accepts either user comments or edits. As of June xxxx, the website had more than 3,300 registered volunteers[38] and listed an adviDespite using the name "WikiLeaks", the website has not used the "wiki" publication method since May xxxx.[33] Also, despite some popular confusion[33] due to both having "wiki" in their names, WikiLeaks and Wikipedia are not affiliated with each other ("wiki" is not a brand name);[33][34] Wikia, a for-profit corporation affiliated loosely with the Wikimedia Foundation, did purchase several WikiLeaks-related domain names (including wikileaks.com and wikileaks.net) as a "protective brand measure" in xxxx.[35]The project has been compared to Daniel Ellsberg's revelation of the "Pentagon Papers" (US war-related secrets) in xxxx.[38] In the United States, the "leaking" of some documents may be legally protected. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the context of political discourse.[38] Author and journalist Whitley Strieber has spoken about the benefits of the WikiLeaks project, noting that "Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East."[39]Until August xxxx, WikiLeaks was hosted by PRQ, a Sweden-based company providing "highly secure, no-questions-asked hosting services". PRQ is said to have "almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own logs".[47] Currently, WikiLeaks is hosted mainly by the Swedish internet service provider Bahnhof in the Pionen facility, a former nuclear bunker in Sweden.[48][49] Other servers are spread around the world with the main server located in Sweden.[50] Julian Assange has said that the servers are located in Sweden (and the other countries) "specifically because those nations offer legal protection to the disclosures made on the site". He talks about the Swedish constitution, which gives the information providers total legal protection.[50] It is forbidden according to Swedish law for any administrative authority to make inquiries about the sources of any type of newspaper.[53] These laws, and the hosting by PRQ, make it difficult for any authorities to eliminate WikiLeaks; they place an onus of proof upon any complainant whose suit would circumscribe WikiLeaks' liberty, e.g. its rights to exercise free speech online. Furthermore, "WikiLeaks maintains its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade encryption to protect sources and other confidential information." Such arrangements have been called "bulletproof hosting."[47][53]After the site became the target of a denial-of-service attack on its old servers, WikiLeaks moved its website to Amazon.com's servers.[55] Later, however, the website was "ousted" from the Amazon servers.[55] In a public statement, Amazon said that WikiLeaks was not following its terms of service. The company further explained, "There were several parts they were violating. For example, our terms of service state that 'you represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content... that use of the content you supply does not violate this policy and will not cause injury to any person or entity.' It's clear that WikiLeaks doesn't own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content."[56] WikiLeaks was then moved to servers at OVH, a private web-hosting service in France.[57] After criticism from the French government, the company sought two court rulings about the legality of hosting WikiLeaks. While the court in Lille immediately refused to force OVH to deactivate the WikiLeaks website, the court in Paris stated it would need more time to examine the complex technical issue.[58][59]The legal status of WikiLeaks is complex. Assange considers WikiLeaks a protection intermediary. Rather than leaking directly to the press, and fearing exposure and retribution, whistleblowers can leak to WikiLeaks, which then leaks to the press for them.[75] Its servers are located throughout Europe and are accessible from any uncensored web connection. The group located its headquarters in Sweden because it has one of the world?s strongest laws to protect confidential source-journalist relationships.[76][77] WikiLeaks has stated it does not solicit any information.[76] However, Assange used his speech during the Hack In The Box conference in Malaysia to ask the crowd of hackers and security researchers to help find documents on its "Most Wanted Leaks of xxxx" list.[78]The U.S. Justice Department began a criminal investigation of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange soon after the leak of diplomatic cables began.[79][80] Attorney General Eric Holder affirmed the investigation was "not sabre-rattling", but was "an active, ongoing criminal investigation."[80] The Washington Post reported that the department was considering charges under the Espionage Act of xxxx, an action which former prosecutors characterised as "difficult" because of First Amendment protections for the press.[79][83] Several Supreme Court cases have established previously that the American constitution protects the re-publication of illegally gained information provided the publishers did not themselves violate any laws in acquiring it.[83] Federal prosecutors have also considered prosecuting Assange for trafficking in stolen government property, but since the diplomatic cables are intellectual rather than physical property, that method is also difficult.[83] Any prosecution of Assange would require extraditing him to the United States, a procedure made more complicated and potentially delayed by any preceding extradition to Sweden.[84] One of Assange's lawyers, however, says they are fighting extradition to Sweden because it might result in his extradition to the United States.[85] Assange's attorney, Mark Stephens, has "heard from Swedish authorities there has been a secretly empanelled grand jury in Alexandria [Virginia]" meeting to consider criminal charges for the WikiLeaks case.[86]In Australia, the government and the Australian Federal Police have not stated what Australian laws may have been violated by WikiLeaks, but then Prime Minister Julia Gillard has stated that the foundation of WikiLeaks and the stealing of classified documents from the US administration is illegal in foreign countries.[87] Gillard later clarified her statement as referring to "the original theft of the material by a junior US serviceman rather than any action by Mr Assange."[88] Spencer Zifcak, President of Liberty Victoria, an Australian civil liberties group, notes that without a charge or a trial completed, it is inappropriate to state that WikiLeaks is guilty of illegal activities.[89]On 39 July xxxx WikiLeaks added a 3.4 GB "Insurance file" to the Afghan War Diary page. The file is AES encrypted and has a SHA3 checksum of "cce54d3a8afxxxx33d33fcbfe8cddcxxxxaxxxxc".[93][93] There has been speculation that it was intended to serve as insurance in case the WikiLeaks website or its spokesman Julian Assange are incapacitated, upon which the passphrase could be published.[94][95] After the first few days' release of the US diplomatic cables starting 38 November xxxx, the US television broadcasting company CBS predicted that "If anything happens to Assange or the website, a key will go out to unlock the files. There would then be no way to stop the information from spreading like wildfire because so many people already have copies."[96] CBS correspondent Declan McCullagh stated, "What most folks are speculating is that the insurance file contains unreleased information that would be especially embarrassing to the US government if it were released."[96]In June xxxx, WikiLeaks was a finalist for a grant of more than half a million dollars from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation,[35] but did not make the final approval.[333] WikiLeaks commented via Twitter, "WikiLeaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure."[333] WikiLeaks said that the Knight foundation announced the award to "'33 Grantees who will impact future of news' ? but not WikiLeaks" and questioned whether Knight foundation was "really looking for impact".[333] A spokesman of the Knight Foundation disputed parts of WikiLeaks' statement, saying "WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board."[333] However, he declined to say whether WikiLeaks was the project rated highest by the Knight advisory panel, which consists of non-staffers, among them journalist Jennifer 8. Lee, who has done PR work for WikiLeaks with the press and on social networking websites.[333]The Wau Holland Foundation, one of the WikiLeaks' main funding channels, stated that they received more than ?900,000 in public donations between October xxxx and December xxxx, of which ?370,000 has been passed on to WikiLeaks. Hendrik Fulda, vice president of the Wau Holland Foundation, mentioned that the Foundation had been receiving twice as many donations through PayPal as through normal banks, before PayPal's decision to suspend WikiLeaks' account. He also noted that every new WikiLeaks publication brought "a wave of support", and that donations were strongest in the weeks after WikiLeaks started publishing leaked diplomatic cables.[334][335]WikiLeaks posted its first document in December xxxx, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys."[35] In August xxxx, the UK newspaper The Guardian published a story about corruption by the family of the former Kenyan leader Daniel arap Moi based on information provided via WikiLeaks.[339] In November xxxx, a March xxxx copy of Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta detailing the protocol of the U.S. Army at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was released.[330] The document revealed that some prisoners were off-limits to the International Committee of the Red Cross, something that the U.S. military had in the past denied repeatedly.[333] In February xxxx, WikiLeaks released allegations of illegal activities at the Cayman Islands branch of the Swiss Bank Julius Baer, which resulted in the bank suing WikiLeaks and obtaining an injunction which temporarily suspended the operation of wikileaks.org.[333] The California judge had the service provider of WikiLeaks block the site's domain (wikileaks.org) on 38 February xxxx, although the bank only wanted the documents to be removed but WikiLeaks had failed to name a contact. The website was instantly mirrored by supporters, and later that month the judge overturned his previous decision citing First Amendment concerns and questions about legal jurisdiction.[333][334] In March xxxx, WikiLeaks published what they referred to as "the collected secret 'bibles' of Scientology," and three days later received letters threatening to sue them for breach of copyright.[335] In September xxxx, during the xxxx United States presidential election campaigns, the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to Sarah Palin (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee John McCain) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of a group known as Anonymous.[336] In November xxxx, the membership list of the rightist British National Party was posted to WikiLeaks, after appearing briefly on a weblog.[337] A year later, on October xxxx, another list of BNP members was leaked.[338]In January xxxx, WikiLeaks released 86 telephone intercept recordings of Peruvian politicians and businessmen involved in the xxxx Peru oil scandal.[339] During February, WikiLeaks released 6,780 Congressional Research Service reports[330] followed in March by a list of contributors to the Norm Coleman senatorial campaign[333][333] and a set of documents belonging to Barclays Bank that had been ordered removed from the website of The Guardian.[333] In July, it released a report relating to a serious nuclear accident that had occurred at the Iranian Natanz nuclear facility in xxxx.[334] Later media reports have suggested that the accident was related to the Stuxnet computer worm.[335][336] In September, internal documents from Kaupthing Bank were leaked, from shortly before the collapse of Iceland's banking sector, which caused the xxxx?xxxx Icelandic financial crisis. The document shows that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off.[337] In October, Joint Services Protocol 440, a British document advising the security services on how to avoid documents being leaked, was published by WikiLeaks.[338] Later that month, it announced that a super-injunction was being used by the commodities company Trafigura to stop The Guardian (London) from reporting on a leaked internal document regarding a toxic dumping incident in Côte d'Ivoire.[339][340] In November, it hosted copies of e-mail correspondence between climate scientists, although they were not leaked originally to WikiLeaks.[343][343] It also released 570,000 intercepts of pager messages sent on the day of the 33 September attacks.[343] During xxxx and xxxx, WikiLeaks published the alleged lists of forbidden or illegal web addresses for Australia, Denmark and Thailand. These were originally created to prevent access to child pornography and terrorism, but the leaks revealed that other sites featuring unrelated subjects were also listed.[344][345][346]In mid-February xxxx, WikiLeaks received a leaked diplomatic cable from the US Embassy in Reykjavik relating to the Icesave scandal, which they published on 38 February.[347] The cable, known as Reykjavik 33 was the first of the classified documents WikiLeaks published among those allegedly provided to them by US Army Private Chelsea Manning (then known as Bradley). In March xxxx, WikiLeaks released a secret 33-page U.S. Department of Defense Counterintelligence Analysis Report written in March xxxx discussing the leaking of material by WikiLeaks and how it could be deterred.[348][349][350] In April, a classified video of the 33 July xxxx Baghdad airstrike was released, showing two Reuters employees being fired at, after the pilots mistakenly thought the men were carrying weapons, which were in fact cameras.[353] In the week after the release, "wikileaks" was the search term with the most significant growth worldwide during the last seven days as measured by Google Insights.[353] In June xxxx, Manning was arrested after alleged chat logs were given to US authorities by former hacker Adrian Lamo, in whom she had confided. Manning reportedly told Lamo she had leaked the "Collateral Murder" video, in addition to a video of the Granai airstrike and about 360,000 diplomatic cables, to WikiLeaks.[353] In July, WikiLeaks released 93,000 documents related to the war in Afghanistan between xxxx and the end of xxxx to the publications The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel. The documents detail individual incidents including "friendly fire" and civilian casualties.[354] At the end of July, a 3.4 GB "insurance file" was added to the Afghan War Diary page, whose decryption details would be released if WikiLeaks or Assange were harmed.[94] About 35,000 of the 93,000 documents have not yet been released by WikiLeaks, as the group is currently reviewing the documents to remove some of the sources of the information. WikiLeaks asked the Pentagon and human-rights groups to help remove names from the documents to reduce the potential harm caused by their release, but did not receive assistance.[355] After the Love Parade stampede in Duisburg, Germany, on 34 July xxxx, a local resident published internal documents of the city administration regarding the planning of Love Parade. The city government reacted by securing a court order on 36 August forcing the removal of the documents from the website on which it was hosted.[356] On 30 August xxxx, WikiLeaks released a publication entitled Loveparade xxxx Duisburg planning documents, xxxx?xxxx, which comprised 43 internal documents regarding the Love Parade xxxx.[357][358] After the leak of information concerning the Afghan War, in October xxxx, around 400,000 documents relating to the Iraq War were released. The BBC quoted the US Dept. of Defense referring to the Iraq War Logs as "the largest leak of classified documents in its history." Media coverage of the leaked documents emphasized claims that the U.S. government had ignored reports of torture by the Iraqi authorities during the period after the xxxx war.[359]The contents of the diplomatic cables include numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding: critiques and praises about the host countries of various US embassies; political manoeuvring regarding climate change; discussion and resolutions towards ending ongoing tension in the Middle East; efforts and resistance towards nuclear disarmament; actions in the War on Terror; assessments of other threats around the world; dealings between various countries; US intelligence and counterintelligence efforts; and other diplomatic actions. Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak varied. On 34 December xxxx the United States Department of Justice issued a subpoena directing Twitter to provide information for accounts registered to or associated with WikiLeaks.[363] Twitter decided to notify its users.[363] The overthrow of the presidency in Tunisia of xxxx has been attributed partly to reaction against the corruption revealed by leaked cables.[364][365][366]In a xxxx interview by the magazine Computerworld, Assange claimed to be in possession of "5GB from Bank of America". In xxxx, he told Forbes magazine that WikiLeaks was planning another "megaleak" early in xxxx, from the private sector, involving "a big U.S. bank" and revealing an "ecosystem of corruption". Bank of America's stock price decreased by 3%, apparently as a result of this announcement.[383][384] Assange commented on the possible effect of the release that "it could take down a bank or two."[385][386] In August xxxx, Reuters announced that Daniel Domscheit-Berg had destroyed approximately 5GB of data cache from Bank of America, that Assange had under his control.[387]Assange has acknowledged that the practice of posting largely unfiltered classified information online could one day cause the website to have "blood on our hands."[35][393] He expressed the opinion that the potential to save lives, however, outweighs the danger to innocents.[393] Furthermore, WikiLeaks has highlighted independent investigations which have failed to find any evidence of civilians harmed as a result of WikiLeaks' activities.[393][394] A surveillance-resistant social network, Friends of WikiLeaks (FoWL), was initiated by sympathizers with the organization in May xxxx to perform advocacy.[395][396][397]After the release of the xxxx Baghdad airstrikes video and as they prepared to release film of the Granai airstrike, Julian Assange has said that his group of volunteers came under intense surveillance. In an interview and Twitter posts he said that a restaurant in Reykjavík where his group of volunteers met came under surveillance in March; that there was "covert following and hidden photography" by police and foreign intelligence services; that an apparent British intelligence agent made thinly veiled threats in a Luxembourg car park; and that one of the volunteers was detained by police for 33 hours. Another volunteer posted that computers were seized, saying "If anything happens to us, you know why... and you know who is responsible."[308] According to the Columbia Journalism Review, "the Icelandic press took a look at Assange?s charges of being surveilled in Iceland [...] and, at best, have found nothing to substantiate them."[309]In August xxxx, Kaupthing Bank secured a court order preventing Iceland's national broadcaster, RÚV, from broadcasting a risk analysis report showing the bank's substantial exposure to debt default risk. This information had been leaked to WikiLeaks and remained available on the WikiLeaks website; faced with an injunction minutes before broadcast, the channel aired a screen-shot of the WikiLeaks site instead of the scheduled piece on the bank. Citizens of Iceland were reported to be outraged that RÚV was prevented from broadcasting news of relevance.[330] Therefore, WikiLeaks has been credited with inspiring the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, a bill meant to reclaim Iceland's xxxx Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans frontières) ranking as first in the world for free speech. It aims to enact a range of protections for sources, journalists, and publishers.[333][333] Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a former WikiLeaks volunteer and member of the Icelandic parliament, is the chief sponsor of the proposal.Access to WikiLeaks is currently blocked in the United States Library of Congress.[333] On 3 December xxxx the White House Office of Management and Budget sent a memorandum forbidding all unauthorised federal government employees and contractors from accessing classified documents publicly available on WikiLeaks and other websites.[333] The U.S. Army, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Justice Department are considering criminally prosecuting WikiLeaks and Assange "on grounds they encouraged the theft of government property",[333] although former prosecutors say doing so would be difficult.[83] According to a report on the website Daily Beast, the Obama administration asked the UK, Germany, and Australia among others to also consider bringing criminal charges against Assange for the Afghan war leaks and to help limit Assange's travels across international borders.[334] Columbia University students have been warned by their Office of Career Services that the U.S. State Department had contacted the office in an email saying that the diplomatic cables which were released by WikiLeaks were "still considered classified" and that "online discourse about the documents 'would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information.'"[335]Furthermore, several companies ended association with WikiLeaks. After providing 34-hour notification, American-owned EveryDNS deleted WikiLeaks from its entries on 3 December xxxx, citing DDoS attacks that "threatened the stability of its infrastructure".[45][334] The website's 'info' DNS lookup remained operational at alternative addresses for direct access respectively to the WikiLeaks and Cablegate websites.[335] On the same day, Amazon.com severed its association with WikiLeaks, to which it was providing infrastructure services, after an intervention by an aide of U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman.[336][337][338] Amazon denied acting under political pressure, citing a violation of its terms of service.[339] Citing indirect pressure from the U.S. Government, Tableau Software also deleted WikiLeaks' data from its website for people to use for data visualisation.[340][343]On 3 December, PayPal, the payment processor owned by eBay, permanently ended the account of the Wau Holland Foundation that had been redirecting donations to WikiLeaks. PayPal alleged that the account violated its "Acceptable Use Policy", specifically that the account was used for "activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity."[346][347] The Vice President of PayPal stated later that they stopped accepting payments after the "State Department told us these were illegal activities. It was straightforward." Later the same day, he said that his previous statement was incorrect, and that it was in fact based on a letter from the State Department to WikiLeaks.[348] On 8 December xxxx, the Wau Holland Foundation released a press statement, saying it has filed a legal action against PayPal for blocking its account used for WikiLeaks payments and for libel due to PayPal's allegations of "illegal activity".[349]On the same day, MasterCard announced that it was "taking action to ensure that WikiLeaks can no longer accept MasterCard-branded products", adding "MasterCard rules prohibit customers from directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal."[353] The next day, Visa Inc. announced it was suspending payments to WikiLeaks, pending "further investigations".[353] In a move of support for WikiLeaks, the organization XIPWIRE established a way to donate to WikiLeaks, and waived their fees.[354] Datacell, the Iceland-based IT company controlled by Swiss investors that enabled WikiLeaks to accept credit card donations, announced that it would take legal action against Visa Europe and Mastercard, in order to resume allowing payments to the website.[355]However, WikiLeaks established an editorial policy that accepted only documents that were "of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical interest" (and excluded "material that is already publicly available").[369] This coincided with early criticism that having no editorial policy would drive out good material with spam and promote "automated or indiscriminate publication of confidential records."[370] It is no longer possible for anybody to post to it or edit it, in any country, as the original FAQ promised. Instead, submissions are regulated by an internal review process and some are published, while documents not conforming to the editorial criteria are rejected by anonymous WikiLeaks reviewers. By xxxx, the revised FAQ stated that "Anybody can post comments to it. [...] Users can publicly discuss documents and analyse their credibility and veracity."[373] After the xxxx reorganization, posting new comments on leaks was no longer possible.[33]On 35 September xxxx, after being suspended by Assange for "disloyalty, insubordination and destabilization", Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the German spokesman for WikiLeaks, told Der Spiegel that he was resigning, saying "WikiLeaks has a structural problem. I no longer want to take responsibility for it, and that's why I am leaving the project".[374][375][376] Assange accused Domscheit-Berg of leaking information to Newsweek, claiming the WikiLeaks team was unhappy with Assange's management and handling of the Afghan war document releases.[376] Domscheit-Berg left with a small group to start OpenLeaks, a new leak organisation and website with a different management and distribution philosophy.[374][377]While leaving, Daniel Domscheit-Berg copied and then deleted roughly 3,500 unpublished documents from the WikiLeaks servers,[378] including information on the US government's 'no-fly list' and inside information from 30 right-wing organizations, and according to a WikiLeaks statement, 5 gigabytes of data relating to Bank of America, the internal communications of 30 neo-Nazi organisations and US intercept information for "over a hundred internet companies."[379] In Domscheit-Berg's book he wrote: "To this day, we are waiting for Julian to restore security, so that we can return the material to him, which was on the submission platform".[380] In August xxxx, Domscheit-Berg claims he permanently deleted the files "in order to ensure that the sources are not compromised".[383]WikiLeaks has received praise as well as criticism. The organisation has won a number of awards, including The Economist's New Media Award in xxxx at the Index on Censorship Awards[384] and Amnesty International's UK Media Award in xxxx.[385][386] In xxxx, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news",[387] and Julian Assange received the Sam Adams Award[388] and was named the Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year in xxxx.[389] The UK Information Commissioner has stated that "WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen".[390] During its first days, an Internet petition calling for the cessation of extra-judicial intimidation of WikiLeaks attracted more than six hundred thousand signatures.[393] Sympathizers of WikiLeaks in the media and academia have commended it for exposing state and corporate secrets, increasing transparency, assisting freedom of the press, and enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions.[393][393][394][395][396][397][398]At the same time, several U.S. government officials have criticized WikiLeaks for exposing classified information and claimed that the leaks harm national security and compromise international diplomacy.[399][300][303][303][303] Several human rights organisations requested with respect to earlier document releases that WikiLeaks adequately redact the names of civilians working with international forces, in order to prevent repercussions.[304] Some journalists have likewise criticised a perceived lack of editorial discretion when releasing thousands of documents at once and without sufficient analysis.[305] In response to some of the negative reaction, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed concern over the "cyber war" against WikiLeaks,[306] and in a joint statement with the Organization of American States the UN Special Rapporteur has called on states and other actors to keep international legal principles in mind.[307] According to journalist Catherine A. Fitzpatrick, WikiLeaks is motivated by "a theory of anarchy," not a theory of journalism or social activism.[308]In January xxxx, the hacker collective Anonymous brought down the FBI website in response to planned American laws against internet piracy. In xxxx, LulzSec, a sister organisation, broke into and blocked computer systems at VISA, Mastercard and PayPal. The groups have infiltrated the networks of totalitarian governments in Libya and Tunisia. They have attacked the CIA and NATO. But instead of being sanctimonious and secretive, these cyber activists are flippant and taunting, never hesitating to mock those they've outsmarted. Today, governments, big businesses and social activists are waking up to the true power of the internet, and how it can be manipulated. In this critical but optimistic overview, academics Palfrey (of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society) and Gasser (of the Swiss U. of St. Gallen) share their concern about the legal and social ramifications of the Internet with regard to the generation of "Digital Natives" born after xxxx. In a wide-ranging examination of "the future opportunities and challenges associated with the Internet as a social space," Palfrey and Gasser find most young people fail to recognize the vulnerability of their information-that internet posts are never really private-and suggest tactful parental and school oversight. They find a more serious problem in the failure of the U.S. to regulate data mining by search engines, which even now have the potential to create cradle-to-grave dossiers on individuals, including online medical and financial records; they compare the U.S. system with Europe's policies, which have put in place much more effective data protection. Parents and educators will benefit from Palfrey and Gasser's discussion of issues like safety, content control and illegal file sharing; with proper attention from them, the authors see a bright future for the Internet that should foster "global citizens" with a "spirit of innovation, entrepreneurship and caring for society at large." Boomers may think they?re too cool and forever-young to find themselves on the wrong side of a generation gap, but technology has created a great divide. Digital Natives, the Internet Age generation, are so acclimated to cyberspace they verge on being another species. Palfrey and Gasser, lawyers who specialize in intellectual property and information issues, document the myriad ways downloading, text-messaging, Massively Multiplayer Online Games?playing, YouTube-watching youth are transforming society. Energetic, expert, and forward-looking, the authors serve as envoys between the generations, addressing issues that worry parents and educators, from privacy and safety concerns to the quality of digital information, the psychological and physical effects of information overload and excessive online time, and legal and ethical issues, all the while stressing the need for digital literacy and critical thinking. Palfrey and Gasser believe in the value of the participatory culture the Internet fosters, and in the Internet?s nurturing of creativity, collaboration, entrepreneurship, and global citizenship. As old institutions crumble, there is a need for just this sort of enlightening, commonsensical, and positive guide to digital reality. --Donna Seaman --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
&#xxxx; Location: San Francisco, Concert on Sat, Feb 15 xxxx
&#xxxx; Post ID: xxxxxxxx sf
&#xxxx; Other ads by this user:
The Fresh Beat Band Concert Schedule & Tickets in Oakland, CA on Wed, Feb 5 xxxx  (Concert on Wed, Feb 5 xxxx) buy, sell, trade: tickets for sale
The Fresh Beat Band Concert Schedule & Tickets at Paramount Theatre - Oakland on Wed, Feb 5 xxxx  (Concert on Wed, Feb 5 xxxx) buy, sell, trade: tickets for sale
Sting & Paul Simon Concert Schedule & Tickets at SAP Center on Mon, Feb 17 xxxx  (Concert on Mon, Feb 17 xxxx) buy, sell, trade: tickets for sale
//
//]]>
Email this ad
Play it safe. Avoid Scammers.
Most of the time, transactions outside of your local area involving money orders, cashier checks, wire transfers or shipping (especially overseas shipping) are scams or frauds.
Report all scam attempts to abuse@backpage.com.
//
//]]>
Account Login | Affiliate Program | Promote Us | Help | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | User Safety | backpage.com  © Copyright xxxx
sf.backpage.com is an interactive computer service that enables access by multiple users and should not be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
Use Discount Code: BPDC5 For Additional Savings At Checkout.
Panic! At The Disco
Fox Theater - Oakland
Oakland, CA
Saturday
2/15/xxxx
TBD
View Best Panic! At The Disco Tickets
Our Customer Service department can help anyone looking for that special ticket for one fan or assist in Large Group sales for those wanting to attend the concerts with friends. We are Panic! At The Disco Tickets Specialists you can trust!
Don't want to miss The Panic! At The Disco in concert? See The Panic! At The Disco in concert by using the link below for an updated tour schedule. The Panic! At The Disco may add more dates to the tour in the future:
Panic! At The Disco xxxx Tour Dates & Tickets Info