I find that when dumps of data are released, other journalists go through it and curate it. So, I see WL as making more good journalism possible because there are a lot of curators who do not also have the resources to collect material to curate.

I didn't mean it as a criticism of wikileaks! What they are doing is great!

It's just, the data itself are useless if you don't find some narrative, some story in it.

And, frankly, Assange himself admitted it before that just releasing dumps and hoping for people to find something in it is not the best thing to do.

I understand. I would like if WL developed the resources to curate as well as release entire data sets.

I agree. And to be fair to governments and spies, we don't know if any of this info is really dangerous to national security. Well, I certainly dont.

Yes, I am a very heavy critic of US spying and so on, over reaching, but equally, the info released must have some filtering so that stuff that is relevant to the general public is released and stuff that is really, genuinely, dangerous is held back. If an independent journalist/lawyer team say something should be held back, I think we have to, even if reluctantly, accept that. So, exactly like the Guardian people are behaving.

I want intelligent considered leaks, not dumps like this. And in some ways, this is not too dissimilar to the NSA slurping data. Mass dump, mass slurp. Neither are good.

Well, at least now we know that, if you visit Oman, you should harden your IT security stance. This type of knowledge is in the public interest, no matter how it's delivered.