[ianterrell]

> smaller Clandestine organisations would by necessary [sic] concentrate more power in fewer hands

I think that "by necessity" is not true here. A smaller organization can not do as much as a larger organization. Ok, a handful of people could stage a coup. Then what? They still need bodies for tax collecting, law enforcement, jailers for the secret prisons, whatever. Those people need information to do their jobs, which increases the circle size, etc, and we're back where we started.

Assange's insight into clandestine organizations as information networks that can be disrupted is profound. You get the choice between large, effective, and open; or small, ineffective, and clandestine.

[EthanHeilman]

>A smaller organization can not do as much as a larger organization.

See 'The Mythical Man Month', SpaceX vs other aerospace companies or the writings of R. V. Jones on the advantages of keeping intelligence agencies small.

>Ok, a handful of people could stage a coup. Then what?

I agree staging a coup is not the same as running a government. Not sure what you point here is.

>You get the choice between large, effective, and open; or small, ineffective, and clandestine.

The current choice is between: large, ineffective and semi-transparent or large, even more ineffective and semi-opaque. I agree with Assange on this.

The danger is that we could get small, effective and truly-opaque, but it is unlikely to happen due to political concerns.

[ianterrell]

> See ... on the advantages of keeping intelligence agencies small.

Excellent resources. For a counterpoint on the specific organization type we're discussing, governments, see libertarianism.

> I agree staging a coup is not the same as running a government. Not sure what you point here is.

You brought up coup as a potential consequence of tightened lines of communication and increased secrecy & concentration of power in a few hands. My point was that even in that hypothetical, in order to transition from coup to government you have to widen the circle again, dilute the power, and we're back to the large-ineffective paradigm again. Short term: maybe maybe consequences; long term: same old story.