This is a straw man fallacy, and completely irrelevant to the discussion, or to the purpose of Wikileaks.

Go to the about wikileaks and have a read. Look at the slashdot article itself. Both use the work 'embargo'. The Advisory Board, and the staff of Wikileaks, are not going to release the information you are suggesting. It's not the purpose to reveal future troop movements, travel plans or secret codes. They reveal what has happened in the past, and how it was ignored, or hushed up, and allowed to continue.

Yes - quite probably. some*one* will.

However, as it stands at the moment, it is quite probable that *many* people are already dying because of corporate or government activities or negligence; and that the reason why any situation goes unchallenged by the democratic voters is often because that they are unaware that the situation is occurring.

Lets face it - when there is a cock-up, and the person or organisation responsible is 'shielded' by corporate cover-up, do you really think that anyone is held truly accountable then?

If you want to live in a world where 'reality' is dictated to you, then I'm sure you can go and find a country that will pander to your requirements. If you choose to bury your head in the sand, and deny that it is in fact *you* as a voter, that are responsible for the actions of your government, and prefer instead to abrogate your democratic role, and instead to put blame on anyone you can point a finger at, then I suppose that is your choice. I hope you are happy with it, and the consequences that could ensue.

Unfortunately, Wikileaks is not only desirable, but absolutely necessary. Yes, someone, somewhere will end up being harmed by information released through the process. But the alternative is far, far more dangerous.

Sometimes, it's not so useful to rely on /. for breaking cutting edge news...

The drug you are interested in is PTC124, otherwise known as Ataluren. It is currently in phase 2 clinical trials IN HUMANS (in the UK, at least) - We have boxes of it...