The Dim-Post

November 29, 2010

Break from my break, NZ Wikileaks headers annotated edition

Filed under: general news — danylmc @ 7:06 pm

It took a while to get around to it but I’ve posted an annotated csv file of the NZ tagged wikileaks cables here. It’s a date list with the tags replaced by glossary explanations of what they all mean.

I’ve used an approximate match for the lookups, so some of them might not be quite right, but it looks a lot more accurate than the exact match algorithm results. (Update: I realised this was lazy so now it looks for an exact match and if this returns a null value it searches for an approximate match.)

The body of the cables relating to New Zealand haven’t been made available yet, and with Wikileaks promising to release further documents progressively over a period of months it could be a while. But that does raise the delicious prospect of New Zealand’s cables getting dumped during the election campaign. The histogram below suggests that this would mostly be bad news for Phil Goff.

About these ads

34 Comments »

  1. Who really cares? Nothing different from the diplomatic activities of the last hundred years. All that’s changed is that the liberal anti-semites have found that in fact it’s the Ayrabs, not Israel who are desperate for the US to nuke Iran.

    Comment by Adolf Fiinkensein — November 29, 2010 @ 7:45 pm

  2. haha Danyl.

    You go away for ten minutes and the place turns into tbr.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — November 29, 2010 @ 9:04 pm

  3. Come on, THE SUN COMING UP TOMORROW would mostly be bad news for Phil Goff. He’s a good-news-free zone.

    Comment by SHG — November 29, 2010 @ 9:14 pm

  4. Great to have you back, Danyl. Looks like Wikileaks already had a significantly positive effect on the NZ blogosphere.

    Comment by eszett — November 29, 2010 @ 11:22 pm

  5. Let me echo eszett: it is good to have you back. And good to see something got your mojo back. I’ve missed you.

    Comment by Spitfire — November 30, 2010 @ 5:59 am

  6. danyl – without you to post an annotated csv file with tags replaced by glossary explanations with an approximate match for the lookups, but more accurate than the exact algorithm results….
    who else will do this ?

    Comment by Cnr Joe — November 30, 2010 @ 6:30 am

  7. You’re right – it was pretty lazy. I’ve replaced it with a more robust formula.

    Comment by danylmc — November 30, 2010 @ 8:04 am

  8. I think we should bear in mind who wrote the cables: during the 05/07 period, the ambassador was Dubbya’s bestie, and given the paranoia surrounding Dubbya’s camp during those days I’m not surprised that bestie fed it. Obama came in 2008, change of guard, so probably the cables went back to the boring old ‘stocks of Reese’s PB cups running low, please help’ variety.

    I don’t think Goff has much to fear.

    Comment by Chris — November 30, 2010 @ 8:34 am

  9. It’s more a running joke, that everything that happens in New Zealand is bad for Phil Goff (inspired, if memory serves, by a DPF post in which Richard Worth’s resignation was ‘bad for Phil Goff’).

    Comment by danylmc — November 30, 2010 @ 8:41 am

  10. Ahh – sorry. So following’s Farrar’s logic Wong gone wrong is bad for Goff in the same way the fact that my favourite cafe has run out of those yummy caramel slices is also bad for Goff?

    Comment by Chris — November 30, 2010 @ 9:34 am

  11. These cable were largely downloaded from the SIPRNet – the US government’s generic “secret” network. This network apparently has an estimated 2.5 million people cleared to use it. In other words, it’s secrets are only secret from people like us, all the people who shouldn’t know almost certainly already did before this release by wikileaks. The whereabouts of the crashed Alien spacecraft certainly won’t be revealed on SIPRNet.

    “Secrets” that are secrets merely because they might embarass someone are always usefully exposed, and that is what is going on here. Arguably, these sorts of revelations should be shared more frequently with the public in a democracy, although that would of course be rather irksome to the political elites.

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2010 @ 10:32 am

  12. Sanctuary: So you think that diplomats shouldn’t be able to make free and frank evaluations of foreign leaders for their governments without fear of said evaluations being made public?

    Comment by Socrates — November 30, 2010 @ 11:32 am

  13. ““Secrets” that are secrets merely because they might embarass someone are always usefully exposed”

    that’s a pretty sweeping generalisation, Sanctuary. The corollary of your statement is: any embarrassment that can be caused by the leaking of secrets is useful – I don’t think it stacks up…

    Comment by nommopilot — November 30, 2010 @ 11:45 am

  14. “Arguably, these sorts of revelations should be shared more frequently with the public in a democracy, although that would of course be rather irksome to the political elites.”

    It might make diplomats more polite or circumspect in official/semi-official communications, but the secrets will just be transmitted through alternative channels.

    Comment by nommopilot — November 30, 2010 @ 11:47 am

  15. Link doesn’t work :-(

    Did Phil Goff’s office hack it?

    Comment by Me Too — November 30, 2010 @ 1:23 pm

  16. Surely that’s a bar chart, not a histogram?

    Comment by James Butler — November 30, 2010 @ 1:24 pm

  17. If it were a proper histogram I guess the bars would touch, but the years represent bins so I think it’s a histogram in the technical sense.

    Comment by danylmc — November 30, 2010 @ 7:03 pm

  18. Danyl, just tried to follow your link and got a ‘not available’ message from googledocs. Husband said ‘ooohh’, but maybe the link’s gone down for innocent reasons?

    Comment by BMW — November 30, 2010 @ 8:10 pm

  19. it is a histogram in the technical sense. in bar charts the columns represent disrete values.

    Comment by Che Tibby — November 30, 2010 @ 8:21 pm

  20. Yep, I knew you would be back….

    Now all is right in the world. For some people at least.

    Comment by millsy — November 30, 2010 @ 9:01 pm

  21. Aww. c’mon y’all, anything DPF writes is is bad news for Phil Goff.
    Anything DPF writes is bad news for anyone who disagrees with the National Party.

    OBTW a graph is a graph. To hell with “bar charts”, “histograms” or whatever.

    A graph is a graph. A rose is a rose.

    Algorithms only matter if the purported results conflict with reality.

    Reality, of course, depends on which culture one is residing in in.

    This does not look good for Phil Goff.

    Comment by peterlepaysan — November 30, 2010 @ 10:23 pm

  22. i forgot what I was gonna say

    Comment by thisdoesnotlookgoodforphilgoff — November 30, 2010 @ 10:30 pm

  23. Danyl, just tried to follow your link and got a ‘not available’ message from googledocs

    Sorry – I didn’t make it publicly available when I updated it. Should be accessible now.

    Comment by danylmc — December 1, 2010 @ 6:10 am

  24. Ta. Works now :-)

    Comment by Me Too — December 1, 2010 @ 12:51 pm

  25. Danyl what is up with having breaks within breaks??

    And every time i read this blog I get more worried for Phil Goff.

    Comment by K2 — December 1, 2010 @ 5:21 pm

  26. The corollary of your statement is: any embarrassment that can be caused by the leaking of secrets is useful

    Take another look at what Sanctuary wrote. I think it’s more like, “embarassment is not sufficient to keep something secret”. If you disagree, you might want to write to your MP about amending the Official Secrets Act: information can be withheld if it might harm the ability of people in the government to offer “free and frank expression of opinion”, but not if it “merely… might embarrass someone”.

    Comment by derp de derp — December 1, 2010 @ 10:12 pm

  27. what’s the source for the tag interpretation? i have failed at google.

    Comment by greg — December 2, 2010 @ 10:21 am

  28. you came back for this?

    Comment by reg — December 2, 2010 @ 9:36 pm

  29. If you really want to be honest, nothing looks good for Phil Goff…..

    Comment by millsy — December 2, 2010 @ 10:35 pm

  30. Wow Danyl you sure got a big response to ‘bad news for Phil Goff’, am I the only one who understood the running joke?

    Comment by ieuan — December 3, 2010 @ 8:25 am

  31. Finally some good news for Phil Goff.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/food-wine/4418676/New-Zealand-wins-pavlova-war

    Comment by Gregor W — December 3, 2010 @ 9:54 am

  32. Goff fails to appear in Wikileaks cables – this is bad news or good news?

    Comment by leon — December 4, 2010 @ 5:53 am

  33. Congratulations to Andrew G, whose appointment to full Profesor has just been announced. Well deserved.

    Comment by Dr Foster — December 6, 2010 @ 11:07 pm

  34. this wiki leaks stuff is only good for….

    Comment by reg — December 10, 2010 @ 7:31 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 388 other followers

%d bloggers like this: