The issue is that breathalyzers have often been found faulty. Also, the evidence that comes from one is usually only available to the prosecution - i.e. your defense does not have a sample stored for outside testing.
WikiLeaks is different. It revels in the revelation of "secrets" simply because they are secret.
The article misses one huge fact - Mr. Ellsberg is an American, Mr. Assange is not. While Ellsberg leaked information people needed to know, he was doing so to show how his country was lying to the population. Assange shows other countries places where their governments have lied to their people due to US pressure.
Who is served by the release of these cables is a huge difference between the two situations.
If there are such serious concerns for what impact the sale will make, block it on anti-trust issues. I'm not one for government regulation, but we have some laws for situations like this.
These weak concessions, and planning on negotiating them down, makes this appear as little but a panacea for the citizens anger when they start getting shafted.
So what impact would this group have on things such as 'Cyberwar'? A number of the governments mentioned in the article have sunk Billions of dollars into the development of such programs - I doubt they'd be happy to just 'write it off'.
Would this group go after China for hacking the Google servers? Or would it focus on catching nefarious individuals wanted for questioning? (Sorry Interpol - you might do decent things, but you deserve to catch flack for that.)
Would this group ease extradition between countries? If so, aren't there warrants out for the heads of Google and Facebook in Pakistan?
What actual purpose would this working group serve?
If the released reports are biased, the government will give us the whole story, right?
Right?
Wikileaks may have a bias, but they also know their message is destroyed if they are shown to censor data for their effort. The 'Collatoral Murder' fisasco showed that. Even there, they provided the full video but put the focus on where *the issue* was for a short attention span viewing crowd.
Apparently the samples are anonymous so linking a blood sample won't work in this case.
Link? No, you are correct. But if your daughter went missing when she was 8. And then 10 years later you found out that a child was born who had her DNA? I could see that being a relief, a ray of hope to a family. Knowing it came from Texas? Texas is big, but a lot smaller than all of the USA/World.
I'm just saying, this could be valuable in such scenarios - regardless of if the donor could be identified.
If I remember correctly, Mitochondrial DNA is from the mother. Therefore, if a child's record happens to match up with, say a kidnap/run-away - it helps to remove the potentiality of a murder, keep the case a missing persons, and provide some possible insight into the general geographic region.
That may be a lot of comfort to a family.
I think it is horrible that these samples are taken without consent, their use obscured, and have deep qualms about any form of DNA database. But, I can see how they could still provide some value.
Access to the Storage Room + Casual Fridays = I show a lot of company morale.
Maybe I should just do laundry more often...
Oddly enough, it was 'Bruce Schneier'.
This file will self-destruct in five minutes.
