WikiLeaks Sisäpiirin salaisuudet

by Daniel Domscheit-Berg

Domscheit-Berg Daniel: WikiLeaks - Sisäpiirin salaisuudet
Tällä kertaa paljastusten kohteena on WikiLeaks itse.

Internetsivusto WikiLeaksin paljastamat diplomaattiraportit ovat kohahduttaneet maailmaa. WikiLeaksin keulahahmo Julian Assange on ollut julkisuudessa myös seksuaalirikosepäilyistä.
Daniel Domscheit-Berg toimi kolme vuotta WikiLeaksin kakkosmiehenä. Viime syksynä kaksikko ajautui välirikkoon. Kirjassaan WikiLeaks – Sisäpiirin salaisuudet Domscheit-Berg kertoo miksi.

WikiLeaksin perusidea on tarjota mahdollisuus vuotaa salaisia poliittisia tai kaupallisia dokumentteja ilman pelkoa kiinni jäämisestä. Daniel Domscheit-Berg paljastaa kirjassaan kuinka WikiLeaks toimii. Hänen kertomuksensa ovat tyystin erilaisia kuin Julian Assangen: Mukana olijoita on paljon vähemmän ja salainen aineisto on saatu paljon helpommin kuin mitä Assange on väittänyt.

Onko Julian Assange tahallaan antanut WikiLeaksin toiminnasta todellisuutta salamyhkäisemmän kuvan? Domscheit-Bergin kovimmat syytökset koskevat Assangen tapaa suhtautua leväperäisesti tietoja luovuttaneiden ihmisten suojelemiseen. Onko Julian Assange tavoitellut vain omaa etuaan?

Paljastuskirja WikiLeaks – Sisäpiirin salaisuudet avaa verhon ”maailman vaarallisimman internet-sivuston” ytimeen, josta vain muutamat ihmiset ovat tähän saakka tienneet.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Technology, History, Biography, Memoir, Journalism

284 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2011

Reviews

[Peter · Rating 2 out of 5]

A difficult book to judge. In large part, it seems to be one side of a battle over a broken relationship. Not knowing the other side, how am I to judge who's right? And why should I bother?

In this particular case, the dispute is between the book's co-author, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, and famed Wikileaks director Julian Assange. I'll credit Domscheit-Berg and/or his co-author Tina Klopp (who I presume is a ghost writer), with showing some restraint; they paint Assange as an arrogant and irresponsible egomaniac, but you can see them trying hard not to seem too obviously one-sided.

As for the truth of the details, how the hell am I to know? It's believable that Assange is an asshole. On the other hand, that's just if you go by Domscheit-Berg's word. Frankly, there are a million stories like this out there: a working relationship gone sour. I've had a few of them myself. Unfortunately this one isn't terribly more interesting than, well, any of mine for example! It's only the celebrity of Assange and Wikileaks that got this book into print.

There are two things that could have redeemed this book. One would have been great writing. I can't speak for the original German edition, but the translation in the English edition was merely workmanlike. Oh, it was handled well enough that it didn't jump out at me as a translation; whoever went over the translation did a good enough job, as far as that goes (and incidentally, I used to touch up and in some cases re-write poorly translated articles for a magazine myself, so I have some experience in this area). But the writing simply isn't anything special. Nor is there, for example, any particular humor to the book.

The other potentially redeeming factor would have been some really insightful details about the workings of Wikileaks. There's some of that here, and it is somewhat interesting. If it's credible (and I have no particular reason to doubt it) then Wikileaks is in a real technological pickle. But again, although I support openness and the stated principles of Wikileaks, technical issues don't mean a lot to me here.

The book is remarkably current. It's about issues that took place as recently as five or six months ago. That's a bit jarring! It gave me the feeling that I could have been reading the whole thing on some online forum.

I also have to say that I can't help but feel a little bit taken advantage of by Mr. Domscheit-Berg. His book seems to be little more than a veiled continuation of a running battle with Julian Assange. Okay, if his account is accurate, then Assange is an irresponsible egotist and bastard. But I wasn't involved in this battle, and why is Mr. Domscheit-Berg making money off of me in pursuit of his war? Apart from anything else, that seems a highly ironic act for someone who professes such high ideals.

Incidentally, the book was a birthday gift from my sister and her husband. I'm quite sure they hadn't read it themselves. It was a thoughtful gift - if you're reading this, sis, I hope this review doesn't hurt your feelings - because I am interested in openness, politics, and Wikileaks. I just wish Domscheit-Berg had produced something more worthwhile and in-depth.

[Stuart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating account of the rise and fall(?) of Wikileaks. I read it cover to cover over two days.

It clearly recounts the early history of Wikileaks and in a way is the account of a breakup of the relationship between Julian Assange and Daniel Domscheit-Berg. Also it is the story of a start-up. It shows what can be done by two driven guys sleeping on sofas with an old server and a concept to sell to the world. Assange is portrayed as brilliant, eccentric and manipulative and Domscheit-Berg often seems like he longs to return to the good old days when they were close friends.

It's interesting to see what has been left out in this book and how it compares to the Guardian's account. I'm waiting for Assange's book, though I wouldn't be surprised if it never gets finished. This book is may be the closest to the truth that we will know. I'm not sure we'll ever find out what is the whole truth was.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

*So far I'm approaching this book as I often tend to, first and foremost, as an interest in the cult of personality. In that respect, meditations on the subject of leadership and generally how one person or a great idea really can change the world are my source of inspiration, here. There are too many threads of thought to follow there, so I will leave it at that for now. I don't doubt your own ability to spearhead that subject independently.

*Otherwise, this story is obviously a one sided version from a 2 person team, and I kind of wonder how much validity to place in that. It would be easy for me to simply take this as a passing of blame or defensive reaction in response to whatever falling out they've had (haven't gotten that far in the book yet), if Domscheit-Berg wasn't so even handed in his rational of their relationship. I'd like to read the same story from Assanges perspective, perhaps just to see how much fact can be verified through their respective P'sOV. Now that I consider it, I'm probably hung up on this idea simply because of the way it is written, with Domscheit-Berg seeming to have this sense of awe at the experience, himself.

*On a more technical side, or as much as I am capable of analyzing with my limited knowledge of the more technical computer system stuff, I'm more interested in the organization from the perspective of how it is set up. It is such and interesting social system in that it is always evolving, having information injected into it and even being run from/by anonymous sources. The simple question of how to glean fact from fiction, or the entire dynamic of this in respect to politicking is a total mind-fuck in itself. Assange has also arranged the organization based on the same sort of model that other closed organization do, with most of the players blind to the larger picture (think CIA) of whatever action or agenda is being fulfilled. It seems counterintuitive to his own philosophy to do so, but it works in that he has set up an organization that can be a functional player on the political chessboard...carved a very particular niche if you will, very impressive!

*OH! how could I forget the censorship issue?!

*either way this book brings up enough questions to spark a huge amount of debate, best for a book club. I'll have to finish this review later! ::frustrated::

...To be continued...

[Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although this book offers a fair bit of interesting information on Wikileaks; the people involved, the set-up behind the scenes, some info on leaks that weren't published, etc, Inside Wikileaks is essentially a vehicle for Daniel Domscheit-Berg's bitter attacks on Assange and I told you so statements.
He plugs his new site, relentlessly attacks and criticises Assange, tells us (with the benefit of hindsight) what he would have done in such and such a situation and other petty, pathetic bullshit. Now Assange doesn't sound like a very nice guy, but he's not exactly on hand to defend himself. One of Berg's biggest problems which he repeated many, many times was how Assange made all decisions and ran Wikileaks as a "dictator" type figure. Maybe, Berg's arrogance IS in fact so strong that he feels even though Assange created and essentially owned Wikileaks, Assange should in fact consult him about everything.
Daniel Domscheit-Berg accuses Assange of using Wikileaks to make himself famous and hints that Assange may have mis-used donations. (Berg himself says he wasn't interested in money, he would have been happy with "€2,500 a month" - how generous he is to take such a miserly wage eh?) However, as is evident, Berg has jumped on the Wikileaks wagon to get himself published and make himself some cash, while simultaneously plugging his new website and bitching at Assange. What a prick.

[Maryan Heffernan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This memoir of WikiLeaks has no literary pretence; however the detailed and chronological account of the web site and its founder is very compelling.

WikiLeaks and Assange need no introduction. This account of Domscheit-Berg’s charts the very scrappy founding of what appeared to be an ad hoc website with limited servers, outdated technologies and a couple of brilliant techies to become a force to be reckoned with worldwide.

He also chronicles the personal relationship between Assange and himself from Assange being his idol and philosophical genius to a rather unattractive, arrogant and self serving leader, paranoid about his team and making unpredictable decisions.

Detailed chat transcripts outline the disintegration of the relationship with a final comment telling the author that “I will destroy you” and “I will not tolerate disloyalty in crisis.” Look out for a new secure site “Open Leaks”

Whatever a persons opinion the Wikileaks phenomena has sparked a debate from journalists to politians and ethicists on the freedom of information and the issue of honesty and tranparency.

[Vasil Kolev · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'll probably need to read Julian Assange's book when it comes out, to compare the picture, but what's said in this book looks right.

There are no technical details on the wikileaks setup, there's nothing that can be used to trace people or disrupt the site, in this regard the book (and the conduct of Daniel Domscheit-Berg) are proper and professional.

It paints the story of wikileaks, and especially of Assange (who is almost the personification of WL), of his behavior, increasing paranoia and some stuff, which for me is just really weird. It tells the story of the leaks they processed, of the problems they had and the people they worked with, and makes a fascinating read, although the whiny tone of the author at some points is a bit off-putting.

[Libros Prohibidos · Rating 3 out of 5]

En algunos momentos el lector puede tener la sensación de estar leyendo una historia de ficción, salida de la mente calenturienta de cualquier escritor de novela negra, por lo que llama la atención saber que todo eso ocurrió y que en realidad surgió de la mente de un joven programador australiano. Reseña completa: http://www.libros-prohibidos.com/dani...

[Pio · Rating 3 out of 5]

Một ngày đọc sách thú vị.

[João Carlos Pires · Rating 5 out of 5]

Inside WikiLeaks: My Time with Julian Assange at the World’s Most Dangerous Website is the book where Daniel Domscheit-Berg, one of the members that joined WikiLeaks in the early days, tells us the inside story of the website responsible for some of the world’s most important leaks. He also describes with a lot of detail the day-to-day at WikiLeaks, the dangerous situations and the risks necessary to share the information with the public. By doing this, we can get to know more about Julian Assange. It’s a kind of biography written without his consent, so we cannot be sure if what the author describes is the true.
Nevertheless, the fact is that some chat conversations are shown and some details and events cannot be denied due to the proofs used. It’s a terrifying version of Wikileaks, in fact.
It started with a good purpose, but quickly turned out to be the project of an authoritarian ‘founder’, as Julian loves to be called. Daniel tried, for sure, to solve all the problems and give a new future to this ambicious project, but, unfortunatelly, he faced a difficult leader, if we can call it so.
By the end of the book, Daniel tells us the ideas behind his new platform, OpenLeaks, which aims to be what the WikiLeaks was supposed to be but never was. This is a really well written book and with lots of episodes that involve not only journals from all arround the world, like The Guardian or The New York Times, but also important politics, like Ursula von der Leyen.
Joining all this, there’s a constant humor on point which makes this book one of my favourites. I already watched the movie that was inspired by the book, The Fifth Estate, but I’ll certainly watch it again with a different point of view after the reading.
As I’m a person that judges only after being told about both sides of the story, I’ll read the Julian Assange autobiography in a near future.
To finish, I recommend this reading, of course, to everyone.

[Jagoda · Rating 3 out of 5]

good but kinda more inside drama than info about how organization like this works, so not that interesting. it has a very nice flow to reading this tho

[Fidelis Eka Satriastanti · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am not a much of WikiLeaks fans nor hater, only a curious citizen. I found this book, literally, hidden among other management themed books. I found out later that this book is one the source for the up-coming movie on WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, titled The Fifth Estate, played by my favorite actor, Benedict Cumberbatch ^_^

I often need to arrange my expectations when it comes on biography or autobiography, not all of them were actually good to read, particularly this one.

I am not oblivious on the impacts and controversies of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange up to date, however, I am having difficulties on getting away from the impression that this book was written filled with anger by its writer and its sole purpose was actually just smear campaigning.

Again, I need to highlight that I have no knowledge about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange in particular. So, I might defend that my review was solely based on the way the book flowed.

The substance of the book is primarily on the author's relationships, personally and professionally, with Assange. It was quite often I found myself confused on what was the author's aim or what had ticked them off. I mean the quarrels were like something bound to happen when you were working with someone else. You don't always agreeable with someone, yet, I sensed the book was pushing Assange's character as someone difficult, paranoid, irrational, unprofessional, and etc. Meanwhile, the author was exactly the opposite and the victim of his former friend and employer.

I am sure that someone with high profile as Assange would have to come with his own eccentricity and egocentricity, so what?! This guy is responsible for all of that chaos on public information and made US on fire, surely there's must be work ethics that could be shared in the book, instead of mentioning : how much he likes to be immersed in his laptop.

It's not like Assange is god or immortal or perfect but I just couldn't find that essential moment where their relationships have gone sour. Was it money? Was it authority? Was it technical? The way that the author repeatedly claimed he was not jealous, sort of made me curious. Most of the times, people making denials are usually admitting them.

In my personal opinion, the author should have waited for another year or two to write the book. To calm down and just jolted down what was necessary or no. Because, the publishing time (2011) was not quite long after he quit in the end of 2010 which only made people, most probably WikiLeaks supporters, assumed that he had grudges on the founder.

Well, I can see that he had hold grudges over the chats between the author and Assange when he was suspended. He wrote that Assange was dictator, but, I found it on his behalf that had started the fire. I think the book's just too premature as Assange and WikiLeaks are developing news so it got the hook. It would be a great book and inspiring for people to defend on free public information campaigns if only it was not too occupied in 'clarifying' the different characters.

[Lukasz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Temat cyberbezpieczeństwa ostatnio mnie zainteresował i przy tej okazji natrafiłem na książkę „Inside Wikileaks”. Książka została napisana przez bliskiego współpracownika Juliana Assange, który założył Wikileaks. Daniel „Schmidt” (taką miał ksywę jako haker, łatwiej będzie mi go tak właśnie nazywać) Domscheit-Berg to niemiecki haker, z zawodu inżynier informatyk. Pracował w firmie informatycznej wspierającej producenta samochodów marki Opel, miał dobrą prace, po godzinach spędzał sporo czasu na różnych forach hakerskich. Jak się pojawiło WikiLeaks zainteresował się tą platformą. Obserwował jej działanie ii zrozumiał że wspieranie wolności słowa, transparentności jest jego powołaniem. Dopiero po jakimś czasie jak się zainteresował tematem WikiLeaks, w grudniu 2007 na hakerskiej konferencji w Berlinie osobiście spotkał Jualiana Assanga. To spotkanie zapoczątkowało współpracę oby dwóch panów. Daniel zaoferował swoje usługi Wikileaks jako wolontariusz, przez kolejne dwa lata nadal utrzymywał prace na pełen etat w firmie informatycznej po godzinach każdą wolną chwile poświęcał pracy dla WikiLeaks. Niedługo po pierwszym osobistym spotkaniu z Assangem ten drugi wprowadził się do mieszkania Daniela w Wiesbaden, gdzie wspólnie pracowali na projektem WikiLeaks. W sumie Assange mieszkał wspólnie z Danielem kilka miesięcy. Assange nie miał zresztą stałego miejsca zamieszkania i po prostu tułał się po świecie.
Daniel „Schmidt” opisuje w książce dość szczegółowo cały przebieg współpracy z Assangem od grudnia 2007 do września 2010 kiedy to ich drogi się rozeszły. Daniel „Schmidt” przez te kilka lat był drugą najważniejszą osobą obok samego Assangea w WikiLeaks. Stąd ta książka jest niesamowicie wartościowa ii pomocna aby poznać fenomen tej platformy internetowej której celem było zwiększenie wolności słowa, demokracji na świecie.
Co ciekawe jeden z głównych serwerów Wikileaks stał w Niemczech. Architektura platformy była tak skonstruowana że całość była mocno zaszyfrowana, platforma gwarantowała anonimowość ludziom którzy wygrywali na nią tajne dokumenty. Wgrane dokumenty najpierw były dostępne tylko samej redakcji WikiLeaks która decydowała co, jak, kiedy opublikować.
Publikowanie materiałów wymagało obróbki dokumentów chociażby dlatego aby zatrzeć wszystkie ślady po osobie która wgrała na platformę tajne dokumenty. W plikach często zawarte są tak zwane metadane które specjalistom bez większego trudu umożliwiają dotarcie do autora dokumentów. Poza tym ujawnienie tajnych dokumenty może również przyczynić się do nieumyślnego narażenia niewinnej postronnej osoby na krzywdę. Tu autor podał bardzo ciekawy przykład który nie dotyczył tajnych dokumentów wywiadu amerykańskiego czy też innej instytucji. WikiLeaks zajmowała się również publikowaniem dokumentów, regulaminów tajnych stowarzyszeń działających między innymi na uniwersytetach amerykańskich. Jedna publikacja właśnie takiego tajnego regulaminu naraziła na krzywdę studenta uczelni amerykańskiej. Przy publikacji ów dokumentu redaktorzy WikiLeaks nie zaczernili w dokumencie unikalnego numeru egzemplarza. To umożliwiło dość agresywnym członkom tajnego stowarzyszenia namierzyć bez problemu chłopaka który udostępnił WikiLeaks ów dokument.
Działanie WikiLeaks, praca w WikiLeaks było wiec związana z dość wielką odpowiedzialnością.
Autor opisuje w dość dużych szczegółach ważniejsze publikacje WikiLeaks w latach 2008-2010. Tymi publikacjami były między innymi ujawnienie sposobu prania brudnych pieniędzy oraz unikania płacenia podatków przez klientów szwajcarskiego banku Julius Bär. Po publikacji rzekomo nawet jeden z członków zarządu tego banku popełnił samobójstwo. Publikacja WikiLeaks przyczyniła się do wielu wyroków sądowych gdzie klienci Banku Julius Bär zostali skazani za unikanie płacenia podatków oraz pranie pieniędzy. Julius Bär groził poważnymi konsekwencjach wobec WikiLeaks, ale bez skutku. Sprawę przeciwko WikiLeaks umorzył sąd.
WikiLeaks opublikował też mnóstwo dokumentów wewnętrznych kościoła Scjentologii ujawniając jak działa ta organizacja. Jak wcześniej wspomniałem WikiLeaks opublikowała również mnóstwo dokumentów regulaminów o tajnych stowarzyszeniach studenckich, ich rytuałach, sposobie działania. Assange i Daniel „Schmidt”stali się wręcz bohaterami narodowymi w Islandii kiedy WikiLeaks opublikowała przekręty bankowe jednego z większych banków islandzkich którego bankructwo przyczyniło się do bankructwa całego kraju Islandii. Assange razem ze „Szmidtem” działali w Islandii przez jakiś czas próbowali tam we współpracy z niektórymi politykami przeforsować przez parlament rewolucyjne prawo prasowe które uczyniłoby z Islandii światowego lidera w ujawnianiu wielkich sekretów. Próby te były jednak bezskuteczne.
WikiLeaks kojarzone jest z publikacji amerykańskich depesz dyplomatycznych. Oczywiście autor pisze też o tym. Niestety młody żołnierz który udostępnił WikiLeaks te dokumenty został skazany przed trybunał wojskowy na ponad 50 lat więzienia, do dziś odbywa tą karę. Nie wiadomo jak przyłapano i udowodniono wyciek temu żołnierzowi.
Autor opisuje też swoją prace jako lobbysta. Osobiście kilkukrotnie spotykał się z ministrami rządu niemieckiego, szczególnie z Ursulą van den Leyen. Lobbingowa praca WikiLeaks przyczyniła się do zawetowania ustawy która miała zwiększyć cenzurę internetu w Niemczech.
Zaciekawiła mnie pewna sprawa nad którą się sam zastanawiałem. Dlaczego WikiLeaks głównie kompromitował instytucje ma zachodzie Europy czy też w Stanach Zjednkczonych? Otóż wytłumaczyć można to w dość prosty sposób. Przyczyna jest dość praktyczna a zarazem prozaiczna. Publikacją dokumentów WikiLeaks zajmują się głównie osoby znające w zasadzie tylko język angielski, czy tez niemiecki. Publikacja na przykład dokumentów w języku rosyjskim czy też chińskim była niemożliwa gdyż nie było nikogo w redakcji WikiLeaks kto znałby te języki.
Końcówka książki poświęcona jest relacji autora z Julianem Assangem. Assange nie był łatwą osobą do współpracy. W pewnym momencie stracił zaufanie względem Daniela „Szmidta”. Panowie postanowili zerwać współpracę. Krótko po odejściu z WikiLeaks Daniel „Szmidt” założył swój własny projekt OpenLeaks.
Bardzo ciekawa książka. Cieszę się że udało mi się na nią trafić.

[Bryan Kelly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like many I share a cautious attitude toward the personal attacks Domscheit-Berg makes on Assange. However, the narrative he tells reasonably explains Wikileaks' unfortunate fracturing. I was persuaded by the read to believe that the goals of Wikileaks are sound and that the project does represent a necessary revolution in transparency, which is big because two years ago, at the time of Cablegate, I wanted Assange dead. I find it unfortunate that Domscheit-Berg's decentralized approach with Openleaks appears not to be working, if the lack of dynamism on the current website is any indication. In all this is a good read that will infuriate those of us who were skeptical of Assange's personal vision from the beginning, even while it persuades that in a more perfect world Wikileaks would be the way the media is ultimately supposed to operate.

[Daniel Mihai Popescu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good. If I knew all that in 2011 it would have been better.

Blog • Twitter • Facebook • LinkedIn • Instagram • Google+

[Denise · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting look behind the scenes of the early days of Wikileaks, but this would certainly have been a better read had the author made at least the slightest bit of effort to pretend that his main reason for writing this book was anything other than airing dirty laundry from a working relationship gone sour.

[Kathy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome book, definately worth a read if you think Assange is a hero. Domscheit-Berg is carefull not to throw any unjust punches Assange's way, and in fact he seems to still like the guy, despite what he did.

[Judith Smulders · Rating 1 out of 5]

A massive disappointment this book. Too little info on Wikileaks itself, its cables and so forth and far too much whining on D D-B's departure from WL. Its more of a break-up narrative consisting of naming all of Julian Assange's quirks.

[Julie · Rating 1 out of 5]

A bit one-sided, the author comes across as bitterly scorned. Instead of informing the reader in a neutral professional manner, the author seems desperate to be seen as the innocent victim and focuses too much on criticizing Assange.

[Gwern · Rating 3 out of 5]

Moved to gwern.net.

[Ana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting.

[Beth Laterza · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very personal. Very interesting. Very good.

[Stelarov B · Rating 1 out of 5]

Lies, fabrications, rage, jealousy, by a defector who deleted hundreds of thousands of documents for ever. Was the money good Daniel? What's the price of your soul?

[Lion]

Interesting. This book is more about what happened practically than Assanges' theory book. I have more trust in Julian than the detractor, and assumed I would not read this because Domscheit-Berg seems to be on the side of the authorities now and warps the narrative to their liking. But I enjoyed it and kept reading.
The tagline of the book seems to suggest that he thinks WikiLeaks is a bad idea. Quote from page 32: "The alpha bears were no doubt accustomed to making others hold their tongues with a single takedown letter." But if the people Domscheit-Berg sides with now still controlled the system, then this wouldn't have happened. The alpha bears would have won. If we only had the traditional "trustworthy" information systems, this stuff would have ended up suppressed.
As in the case of the BND guy unwittingly confirming the authenticity of their documents, the old power structures were still used to a pre-internet world where everyone would unquestioningly bow to their intimidation, and a wiggle of the magic "we have guns" wand would make every disarmed peasant obey in compliant servitude. This is the old world that is doing away thanks to technology. It's not 1944 any more. It was the same time as the silk road, 2008. I view this as a broader battle of technology development unseating old power structures.
Notes:
-WikiLeaks won in the legal system, not just because of technology giving them the longer lever.
-He describes how they learned from the Scientology leaks and inadvertently applied their manipulation tactics, becoming like them.
-They were publicity masters. Interesting how so much of the early WikiLeaks work was was successful because of social manipulation. It had to come from the left, right-wingers would just not have been very good at that. They are logical and don't understand social manipulation well. In the spy game, it was always the commies who turned the capitalist agents. I assumed since WikiLeaks was libertarian they must have been cognitive right-wingers, but they were not.
-Domscheit-Berg strongly highlights Assanges autistic traits, in a sense implying he's not quite mentally competent.
(I'm at page 100.)

[Morthen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tämä kirja tarttui käteen kirpputorilta 1 euron hintaan. Hinta huomioiden kirja oli hinta/laatu-suhteeltaan hyvä. Se oli helppo ja nopea lukea, kannesta kanteen reilussa päivässä.

Kirja itsessään jätti vähän ristiriitaisen ja epämääräisen vaikutelman. Päällimmäiseksi tunteeksi kirjasta jäi katkeruuden ja kaunan täyttämä kirja, jossa kahden kaveruksen riitannuttua toinen heistä päättää kirjoittaa "höyrynsä" pihalle, maustaa tarinan niin monella pienellä detaljilla, että lukija uskoisi tarinaa, sen jälkeen kirjoittaa väheksyvästi ja negatiivisesti henkilökuvaa toisesta luoden, sinänsä kronologisesti etenevän tarinan muistikuvistaan, sanomatta käytännössä paljoakaan...

Vaikea uskoa (mutta mahdollisesti tai todennäköisestikin on totta), että näin toiminta Wikileaksin sisällä on tosiaan toiminut. Ainakin kirjan kirjoittajan näkökulmasta katsottuna.

Eräs mielenkiintoinen kohta oli mielestäni siitä, että siinä kuvattiin kohta, missä joutuivat miettimään, voivatko julkaista tietovuotoa, joka koski Wikileaksia itseään, heidän paljastettuun vahingossa heitä tukeneitten henkilöiden sähköpostiosoitteet...

Toinen itseäni hymyilyttämään pistänyt kohta oli jälkisanoissa, missä muistutettiin (WarGames-elokuvasta tulleesta) sanonnasta: "The only winning move is not to play" - muistuttaen mieleen ainoan strategian, millä tietyissä tilanteissa voi voittaa. (War Games-elokuvassa ydinsodan uhkan ja tässä kirjan tilanteessa sen, että kohdehenkilö joutuisi puolustautumaan julkisesti esitettyjä, perättöminä pitämiään väitteitä vastaan).

En hirveästi suosittele tai ole suosittelematta kirjaa, jokainen tehköön oman päätöksensä.
Itselle kirja antoi reilun päivän lukukokemuksen ja oli mielestäni tuon 1 euron arvoinen. (Tai kuka tietää, kenties pistän sen 50 sentillä eteenpäin myyntiin ;)

[David Nisui · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nerds be crazy.
Governments be secretive.
Good ideas be ruined by bad people.

This books is one-third of a story that also concerns Julian Assange and Government, and I have no way of knowing which of the three to trust with what. However, some important conclusions have been drawn:

1. Power-hungry nerds can be paranoid and terrible at social interaction and this can ruin the good ideas they come up with.

2. Either the US government tried to create a "smear campaign" against Julian Assange to a) publicly discredit him and WikiLeaks and/or b) get him to the US so he could be tried there... or it did not.

3. Either Julian Assange sexually harassed or raped two Swedish women... or he did not.

(2) and (3) are not mutually exclusive. On the one hand, the US government certainly had enough motivation to want to discredit Julian Assange and put him in jail. On the other hand, it also seems very possible Julian Assange did sexually harass two Swedish women at some point based on... what he seems like. The question is, are these two probable-facts connected? Did the US government have some hand in getting the Swedish women to tell the police about their encounters with Assange? That's what Assange claims (he also claims zero sexual misconduct), and since the statue of limitations expired and the trials never went anywhere, who knows.

While far fewer scandals exist about Daniel Domscheit-Berg, he has been alleged by at leaat two people (I think one was Assange) to have connections to the German intelligence. This seems like much more of a stretch, and I can't see clear motives; however, the fact that OpenLeaks never actually happened is kinda sus.

The problem is that I have no idea which reporters are in who's pocket, and it is just as likely for all of these scandals to have been "nerds be crazy" as it is for them to have been "governments be secretive." Oh well.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very interesting book. Its protagonist is one of the people responsible for running Wikileaks in its critical stages around 2007-2010, starting with when he, soon to become the deputy in Wikileaks, first met with Julian Assange, and ending in Assange's arrest in Britain and the fallout in relationships and technology in Wikileaks itself.

One of the hallmarks of interesting books are that they not only make the reader think, but also can arise powerful feelings among the readership. The fact that, among others, some of the reviewers of the book here at Goodreads refer to Domscheit-Berg as "prick" and worse, attests to the power of the book in those terms.

If one is to take a more neutral look, the book describes a dynamic of revolutionary-minded organization and a typical power struggle for leadership between a clearly sociopathic and narcisistic leader, and a deputy who suffers from an inferiority complex in relation to the said sociopath. The book, taken in itself, thus reads as a description of group psychology and jockeying for power and limelight of individuals, the very same individuals who are quick to retreat into moral posturing and accusations of conspiracies. In the end, the book describes a tragedy: an almost-complete destruction of a potentially very powerful organization, brought about by its pathologically self-interested, vain and paranoid leaders. In that, it certainly provides an interesting, eye-catching story that is easy to follow, lest you refrain from quickly taking sides for or against the protagonist - if anything comes clear from this book, it is that Wikileaks had no heroes.

[Mark Bray · Rating 4 out of 5]

Its a really interesting book for those who remember how influential WikiLeaks was for a very short period of time. In some ways it completely disrupted journalism and the narrative that can often be set by world leaders. We are all aware that things happen in the background and that the public are unaware of, but WikiLeaks completely rewrote the rulebook on how information could be leaked to the public.

Creating such a system I find remarkable that someone could want to do that, but also invest so much time and effort in doing so. WikiLeaks had the potential to completely turn the world upsidedown and hearing this from the inside is fascinating.

I only give this 4 stars since the book kind of plays out how I expected. Its lots of analytical thinking of what Assange thought and how he operated. One of my favourite parts of the book was how he would often dupe people into thinking it was a big operation with fictitious people when really he was replying to all the emails. There are many other instances that show how one or two individuals can really take on the world order. That is both positive and worrying, but great reading how it all played out.

For anyone interested in how information reaches the public, those in media for example, will likely find this interesting. Nothing juicy is revealed, its more about telling the story and for that I think its a solid book without being overly spectacular.

[Laurent · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ein perfekt geschriebenes buch. Beinah wollte ich es 4 sterne geben bis ich paar andere rezisionen gelesen habe. Ich hab mich dann mit 3 zufriedengestellt da es trotzdem ein netter buch war.

Dieses buch erzählt die geschichte von Wikileaks von ihrer geburt bis zu ihren ende. Nun ja es gibt wikileaks immernoch, aber ich meine bis alles bergab ging mit denn Amerikanischen dokumenten leak und das wohl berühmte Collatoral Murder video das zeigt das die Amerikaner unschuldige zivilisisten im Irak krieg erschossen hat. Ich erinnere mich noch wie das damals große zeilen in denn nachrichten gemacht hat. Heutzutage ist wikileaks wohl im ruhestand nachdem Assange in gefängnis gelandet ist. Traurig.

Trotz der tiefst interessanten story, fühl ich mich gezwungen von 4 sterne auf 3 runter zugehen. Der grund dafür ist meine kritik, denn diese buch sehr einseiting. Wir können nur Daniel vertrauen und hoffen das er die wahrheit erzählt über Assange. Von seiner seite aus wissen wir nichts.
Aber wir wissen auch kaum was die anderen mitglieder und unterstützer zu sagen hatten. Deren meinungen werden kaum erwähnt, es sei denn sie stimmen sich Daniel seiner meinung zu. Kommt mir etwas voreingenommen vor.

Nachdem ich meine kritik geäußert habe, würde ich dieses buch trotzdem weiterempfehlen für jeden der such über wikileaks und gerechtigkeit interessiert.

[Xen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Evaluating or reviewing this book is not easy, many complex personal ramifications are part of the story and both Daniel Domscheit-Berg and Julian Assange are complex individuals with very subjective perspectives.

If you really want to educate yourself about WikiLeaks I would recommend a more factual book, this one is more human anticipation, a glimpse into a friendship/or rather interpersonal relationship that lost trust in the midst of dangerous situations and has now ended up as more of an enmity.

It has to be said that I don't think Daniel Domscheit-Berg has always acted morally correct and with the right motives, while Assange is a controlling, crazy villain. It all sounds more like missteps on both sides and a lot of negative feelings that have manifested and have now turned into dislike. There are so many different aspects to look at in this story, and each opens up countless debates.

I think WikiLeaks was an important invention and what it accomplished matters, just as Julian Assange does socially. We can't judge the role he played as a human being, and the fact that he's on the autistic spectrum unfortunately doesn't help the discourse, but simply pushes ableistic comments.

It will probably be particularly interesting to read Assenge's book and see where the middle lies and what the founders of WikiLeaks will go down in history as.

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Julian Assange -- "Daniel has a disease, it's some kind of borderline paranoid schizophrenia."

By page 238 of this book, where the quote is found, it seems clear that Assange is a frequent, and apparently unwitting, practitioner of the elementary psychological problem of "projection," and clearly so in the quote above.

While it's quite possible that WikiLeaks would never have taken off the way it did without Assange, from Daniel Domscheit-Berg's account of his time there, it's also clear, by the same token, that its later stumbles and problems wouldn't have happened without Assange at the helm, either. (And that's not to mention Assange's personal legal problems, which, whatever happened in Sweden, seem to likely have a high degree of self-inflictedness.)

The ultimate picture? A modernized version of something like the House of Atreus, with a king devouring his own children.

No, this book isn't perfect. It does have elements of the he said, she said, It may have been rushed to market a bit to play off Assange's Swedish rape charges and British hearing. And, it sadly lacks in pre-WL backgrounding of Assange, which would have given more depth to Domscheit-Berg's psychological profiling of Assange.

With those caveats, though, it's still a good book. A very good book, given those circumstances. And, given that Domscheit-Berg occasionally turns the psychological spotlight on himself, and notes that he wasn't the only person inside WikiLeaks to have serious problems with Assange, this book is most definitely not sour grapes.

That all said, I hope for two things:

That at least a few Assange-worshipers will read the book honestly and look at the need for *good* transparency-boosting web organizations that practice what they preach, and

That Domscheit-Berg learns from his own issues that he brought to WL, as well as Assange's, in making OpenLeaks to be that organization.

That said, given the libertarian, solo nature of what drives many hacker or quasi-hacker types on the Web, I fear that is easier said than done.