[dannyb]

I agree, I don't think the guy is really in it for altruistic reasons.

That being said, the US doesn't look so great in complaining about the consequences of released sensitive information. If it is so important and people's lives depend on it, then why not invest more in information assurance?

[X-Istence]

The US Government, and the US armed forces are looking for a way to better control their information and how it is accessed and by who. There are plenty of people working on the problems, the thing is that the whole system is currently inherently insecure and that securing such a system takes time.

[0x44]

Why does he have to be in it for altruistic purposes if what he does accomplishes an altruistic outcome?

[lepht]

"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

-Abraham Lincoln (http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2008/December/...)

[0x44]

I'm sorry, I fail to see how that resolution would be recognizably altruistic from a modern perspective. Had Abraham Lincoln "saved" the Union without freeing any slaves, there would have been no philanthropic regard for others, it would have instead been the government capitulating to monied interests. That Abraham Lincoln was willing to sacrifice an altruistic and noble outcome for political expediency shouldn't detract from the actual good freeing the slaves wrought.

To be fair, I'm a consequentialist, we might be arguing morality at cross-purposes.

[lepht]

>That Abraham Lincoln was willing to sacrifice an altruistic and noble outcome for political expediency shouldn't detract from the actual good freeing the slaves wrought.

Exactly. My quote was an example to support the sentiment of your post, not argue against it.

Ultimately the end result and lasting impact was the freeing of the slaves, history and time rendered Abe's intentions/motivations nearly irrelevant outside of historical study.

[0x44]

Aha! My apologies, I should have realized.