Assange is 39, not 22 (though, admittedly, he does not look his age).
Assange explains why he is a figurehead in his Q&A session with CNN: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-03/world/wikileaks.assange.q...
I find it telling that the one actually interesting and critical question from an actual diplomat, about to what extent he feels his leaks are undermining the diplomatic process, is the one question he refuses to answer.
Given that Assange wants to bring down secretive government, it's pretty obvious he wants to undermine diplomacy.
If that was the case, then why doesn't he have balls to admit it?
Re:Assange arrested in London (BBC)
by steveklabnik on Tuesday December 07, 2010 @05:54PM
(#1981014)
When hasn't he?
In the CNN interview that was linked to above.
I hadn't actually read that Q&A - very interesting and a reasonable point in his answer to the figurehead question (although I would suggest that Wikileaks could simply lower its profile and become an anonymising conduit, thus negating the need for verified comms with the public at all).
Keeping with my 'The Matrix' / Philip K. Dick geek fantasy rant though, check out the last few sentences from his interview:
"History will win. The world will be elevated to a better place. Will we survive? That depends on you."
Love the drama!
Oh, sorry, I didn't realise you were referring to Manning. My apologies.
Some of the material I've read so far is interesting. Very little surprises me. None shocks me.
There is no technological achievement here, either in the original leak, or the distribution of the material. If anything, I get the impression that Wikileaks is fairly inept.
I'm not really against the leak - I've enjoyed reading the material. One of the things (genuinely) that I've found fascinating is the quality of the writing - I wish some of the people I work with could write as well.
Irritating people do get to me though, and I'm beginning to lump Assange in with Jimmy Wales. Wikipedia, and Wikileaks both have larger than life, seemingly egocentric figureheads. Both services depend heavily on the efforts and religious-level fervour of other people who often do things for free or near-free.
Weird? I mean, if I ran a web site that distributed material which might get a governmental back up, I would probably keep a low profile.
Looking forward to some robust comments on my thoughts!