BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Wikileaks is not transparent

So, alcoholics anonymous is not a non-profit rehabilitation center because the alcoholics getting rehab are anonymous? Or any non government non profit organization that protects the identities of victims or clients is not non-profit because... um... a little insight: "A nonprofit organization (abbreviated as NPO, also known as a not-for-profit organization[1]) is an organization that does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals." - [[The Nonprofit Handbook: Everything You Need to Know to Start and Run Your Nonprofit Organization (Paperback), Gary M. Grobman, White Hat Communications, 2008]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organization#cite_note-1]] "Schools don't pay sales tax on supplies because they have nonprofit status."- [[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonprofit]] [[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:nonprofit&sa=X&ei=kilETa2IKJOxhQfamIGzAQ&ved=0CBoQkAE]] "Non-profit definition: Operated as nearly as possible at cost; an organization not seeking profit and which does not disgorge excess income to its members, in the form of dividends or otherwise." -[[http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/N/Nonprofit.aspx]] as in zero/no premium/ordinary shareholders.
Wikileaks is not accountable

Right because when you write a company's name is block capitals it automatically becomes sinister. Sunshine press, is a company and does not pretend not to be. Is wikileaks, sunshine press? Uh no. Sunshine press aides to start up a lot of organizations, all kinds of organizations... wikileaks might be one of them but it's like saying a book/author is a publishing house. This is the postal address on their website : "BOX 4080 Australia Post Office - University of Melbourne Branch Victoria 3052 Australia" [[http://wikileaks.ch/Submissions.html]] [[http://wikileaks.ch/Mirrors.html]] The Ehf in Iceland(A.K.A Iceland's Datacell EHF) is the European humanist federation [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Humanist_Federation]] [[http://www.humanistfederation.eu/]] [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEa_-ZBukNk&feature=player_embedded#at=16]]
Wikileaks is not responsible

Then why do you hold wiki-leaks responsible??? Ah yes, we should all be wary of the many many 'pathetic computer experts' lurking in our midst. True production, sure or do you mean 'truth' production? But hang on, the premise behind this debate was your claim that wiki-leaks is not an NPO, and now you're backtracking on that pronouncement by stating you don't know? no one knows? I believe this sort of buffoonery is not helping your case; not at all. So I'm curious, how do feel about debate-wise publishing your nonsensical tirade? I'm guessing...and this a long shot; that "wikileaks_crime" is not your real name? Talk about lack of transparency...
Wikileaks does not abide by the law

Anyone can break the law, that doesn't mean a criminal is not a person. if a child commits a crime s/he is still a child. If a doctor murders his wife, he is still a doctor. if a clown steals from you then the clown has not transformed into a non-clown. Whether laws have been broken, will and should be decided in court. The laws? The true purpose of making money, yes right, you seem to be suggesting that everyone else lives on air and air alone. People don't 'suffer in jail' unless courts find them guilty of whatever they are accused of. Wiki-leaks is not a court/judge and does not sentence anyone to anything. So witnesses should 'never' come forward without revealing their identities? how do you feel about witness protection programs? Why do you want squealers to be punished? Why do you want criminal activity to be secret? 'Allegations', which according to you by the grace of wiki-leaks 'anyone' can make about anyone. On the one hand you make issue with any accusation being made against anyone, because you claim it's a non-transparent breach of privacy (which in itself is oxymoron-ic) and on the other hand you tout the 'allegations' against Assange as if they are unquestionably true.
The types of jobs that the majority of the population in developed countries hold have changed: phys...

Many jobs are still blue rather than white collar forms of employment. In such cases, there are still significant physical demands on employees, which older workers may not be able to cope with. Such demands are even increasing, e.g. in the form of travel, in an era of globalisation. Slower reaction times and lapses in memory could make older workers dangerous to themselves and others in some areas of employment.
A free press is essential to the functioning of a free-market economy, exposing corruption and disho...

A free press is essential to the functioning of a free-market economy, exposing corruption and dishonesty on the part of public officials and businesses. If investigative journalists are prevented from scrutinising the private lives of public figures, then corruption and crime will be much easier to hide. For example, just how does a senior civil servant afford a Ferrari, a yacht and a villa in Monaco on his government salary?
No clear dividing line can be drawn between public and private behaviour – drawing up rules will be ...

No clear dividing line can be drawn between public and private behaviour – drawing up rules will be arbitrary and will exclude at least some corrupt or dishonest behaviour of bearing. For example, President Mitterand of France hid his cancer from the French electorate for years – was this a public or a private matter? He also had a mistress and illegitimate daughter, who were secretly taken on some of his foreign visits at state expense; again, is this a private or a public matter?
Many politicians (and religious leaders) make an explicit or implicit campaign point out of their fa...

Many politicians (and religious leaders) make an explicit or implicit campaign point out of their family values and other aspects of their “private” life, for example by being photographed with their loyal family, and through policy stands on such issues as divorce, single mothers, sex education, drugs, etc. If the public image such people seek to create is at variance with their own practice, such hypocrisy deserves to be exposed.
Public figures seek this status knowing that it will bring attention to their private lives – pop st...

Public figures seek this status knowing that it will bring attention to their private lives – pop stars, footballers, etc. Constant scrutiny is the price of fame. Many celebrities actively seek media exposure in order to advance their careers, revealing many aspects of their personal lives; once success has been bought in such a fashion it is hypocritical to complain of “press intrusion” into those few aspects the star would prefer to remain hidden.
The people have a right to know about those in power over them. Their salaries are paid for by the ...

The ‘public interest’ is not the same thing as what the public is interested in. There will always be a fascination in learning intimate details about the lives of the powerful and famous, but this should not be a reason to deny public figures the right to privacy that the rest of us enjoy. Nor should public figures be held to higher standards of personal behaviour than the rest of society by a sensationalist press seeking only to sell newspapers. If newspapers were forced to focus upon the policies and public actions of politicians, rather than their personal foibles, democracy would be better served.
All elections are to a greater or lesser extent about the character of the leading politicians invol...

Private morality and eccentricities have no automatic relationship to someone’s ability to do a job well. Many great political leaders have had messy personal lives, while others, with blameless private lives, have been judged failures in office. If modern standards of press intrusion and sensationalism had been applied in the past, how many respected leaders would have reached or survived in office? Kennedy (adultery)? Roosevelt (disability)?
No clear dividing line can be drawn between public and private behaviour – drawing up rules will be ...

Continual probing into the private lives of public figures actually harms the functioning of democracy. Very few potential candidates will have entirely spotless private lives, free from embarrassing indiscretions committed while young and irresponsible. The prospect of fierce and unforgiving press scrutiny will thus deter many from seeking public office and deny their talents to the public good. Those who do present themselves for election will therefore tend to be rather unrepresentative individuals of a puritanical nature, whose views on sex, family life, drugs, etc. may be skewed and intolerant as a result.
Public figures seek this status knowing that it will bring attention to their private lives – pop st...

Many public figures achieve celebrity status largely by mistake; it is a by-product of their pursuit of success in their particular field. For example, most professional footballers wanted when young simply to become the best player they could be, at the highest level they could reach. They do not wish to be “role models” and claim no special moral status, so why should their private lives be subjected to such public scrutiny?
The people have a right to know about those in power over them. Their salaries are paid for by the ...

The people have a right to know about those in power over them. Their salaries are paid for by the people (whether through taxes, in the case of politicians and civil servants, or by revenue generated by films, CDs, TV, etc., in the case of celebrities). The decisions of public political figures affect many aspects of people’s lives; in exchange the people have the right to make informed judgements about the kind of leaders they have. Any attempt to restrict what may be reported about public figures in the press could easily become a conspiracy to keep voters in the dark and to manipulate them.
The creation, storage and destruction of embryos can be strictly controlled. In the United Kingdom, ...

The creation, storage and destruction of embryos can be strictly controlled. In the United Kingdom, the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Act 1990 and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) require the licensing of each project involving the use of embryos.The 1998 report of the HFEA, ‘Cloning Issues in Reproduction, Science and Medicine’, was informed by the views of the national scientific community and was crucial to the passing of legislation to permit stem cell research in the United Kingdom.There should be no fear of ‘Frankenstein science’.
We must appreciate that the moral status of the embryo is distinct from that of the foetus. In the U...

We must appreciate that the moral status of the embryo is distinct from that of the foetus. In the United Kingdom, the embryo is not recognised as having any rights at law until the fourteenth day after creation, when the ‘primitive streak’ becomes visible.There would seem to be no reason to recognise that life begins at the stage of embryo creation. The accepted test for clinical death is an absence of brain stem activity. Yet the foetus first acquires a functioning brain six weeks after the embryo has been created.We cannot condone the ‘wastage’ of human embryos. However, we must be wary of regarding the loss of an embryo as the loss of human life.
Human embryos cannot be regarded as equivalent to human beings on the ground that they could develop...

Human embryos cannot be regarded as equivalent to human beings on the ground that they could develop into adults. Between fifty and seventy per cent of embryos are lost naturally through failing to implant in the wall of the uterus. The potential of an embryo to develop does not itself make it human. As Peter Singer has observed, this approach would mean that every sperm and ovum should be treated as microscopic human beings. Moreover, until approximately 14 days after fertilisation, the embryo can split into two or more genetically identical embryos. How can we consider an embryo to be an ‘individual’ that lives or dies, when it could naturally develop into twins or become nothing at all?
The requisite research cannot be achieved without the use of the stem cells that are found in embryo...

The requisite research cannot be achieved without the use of the stem cells that are found in embryos. Research into adult cells has yielded very little progress on account of the difficulty of ‘reprogramming’ an adult cell to develop as the particular neuron or tissue cell that is required.It is possible that greater understanding of human cells will increase the utility of adult cells in the future. For the present, resources should be concentrated on stem cell research.
The motivation for all medical research is consequentialist (i.e. primarily seeking beneficial outco...

There is no moral guidance provided by merely hoping that a good final consequence will result. Medical research should be governed by moral concerns, and specifically the duty owed by every human being towards another. However much sympathy we feel for sufferers of terminal diseases, we cannot tolerate the use of human embryos as means to the end of The stem cell research project is inherently contradictory ; lives would be created and then destroyed, in order to save another life. There is no overall good consequence when life must always be destroyed.
We already accept the creation and destruction of ‘spare’ embryos for cycles of in vitro fertilisati...

The loss of embryos in IVF is a ground for condemning IVF treatment. It is not a reason for allowing another procedure that will sacrifice much more potential life. Moreover, IVF is already a technology that is the number of embryos that are ‘wasted’ annually by IVF is far in excess of the number predicted by scientists when the practice was made legal. The Nuremberg and Helsinki Declarations were drafted in order to protect humans from the horrors of experimentation envisaged by Nazi eugenicists. The same duty is owed to pre-human subjects.
The creation, storage and destruction of embryos can be strictly controlled. In the United Kingdom, ...

The value of scientists regulating other scientists is highly questionable. The HFEA is a body composed of experts in the field of embryology and is accountable to Parliament only by the means of annual reports.The much publicised case of Diane Blood, in which she sued the HFEA for the return of gametes that were being stored on her behalf, suggests that the body is distant from public feeling and subject to proper review only by the courts.The media fears of mad scientists free to manipulate and destroy human life may be overstated. However, there is a significant risk that research projects will destroy thousands of embryos with little monitoring and with even less scientific gain.
We must appreciate that the moral status of the embryo is distinct from that of the foetus. In the U...

The embryonic human should have the same moral status as the foetus or the child or the adult.The primitive streak was chosen by the Warnock Committee as a purely arbitrary point after which experimentation on human embryos would become unlawful.There is no accepted physiological point at which the embryo suddenly becomes more ‘human’ than before.The fact that the embryo looks different from the foetus and from the adult is not enough to prove that the embryo is not a human being. It would be remarkable to predicate humanity on physical appearance. The status of a human being does not depend upon whether he is physically familiar or attractive.
Human embryos cannot be regarded as equivalent to human beings on the ground that they could develop...

The proper test of humanity should concern whether the embryo has the potential to organise itself into a ‘living human whole’.Every embryo has this capacity. The sperm and the ovum do not have the potential of self-organisation. Together these gametes have the slight potential of achieving fertilisation.The fact that embryos are lost naturally does not imply that is morally appropriate for scientists to destroy embryos. As Paul Ramsey has stated, man has no right per se to mimic the actions of nature. For example, the possibility that a rock might fall naturally and hit my friend, does not mean I have a right to throw a rock and hit my friend.
The motivation for all medical research is consequentialist (i.e. primarily seeking beneficial outco...

The motivation for all medical research is consequentialist (i.e. primarily seeking beneficial outcomes). Although the research procedure will involve the creation and destruction of thousands of embryos, the resulting benefits will outweigh the cost in human material. Once the research goals have been achieved, the use of embryos in the treatment phase can be greatly reduced. The likely consequences of curing people of fatal neurodegenerative diseases, and ensuring the success of transplant surgery are worth the cost.
We already accept the creation and destruction of ‘spare’ embryos for cycles of in vitro fertilisati...

We already accept the creation and destruction of ‘spare’ embryos for cycles of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. IVF facilitates the creation of human life. Stem cell treatments will allow the saving of existing human life. The infertile will still survive. The sufferers of Huntingdon’s Chorea, or those who urgently require an organ transplant, will not.Thus the moral argument in favour of allowing stem cell treatment is even stronger than in respect of IVF.
In times of recession there is pressure to protect declining industries. Some localities, or countr...

Protectionism worsens depressions by cushioning firms from their effects, preventing sufficient diversification of sources of national income, and discouraging retraining to meet the needs of the future. The Depression of the 1930s was in fact worsened by restrictions placed on free trade (e.g. the USA’s Hawley-Smoot measures), as protectionism spiraled downwards into increasing retaliation.
Reform has the effect of levelling the playing field for candidates. Candidates of enormous leaders...

. Even under the most radical proposals for reform, loopholes exist that enable candidates to spend more or reach their audiences through alternative means. This was precisely the kind of development that led reformers to want to close the soft-money loophole. As with the tax system, the more elaborate the regulation, the more obscure and distorting the ways that are adopted to get around it.
Campaign finance reform advances the goal of a broader marketplace of ideas, advancing the objective...

Most campaign finance reform proposals actually have the effect of limiting speech. By limiting the amount of money a candidate can spend, what they can spend it on, and the time and nature of the message they can send, candidates’ speech is limited. This is particularly true if the money being spent is the candidate’s own. Attempts to limit the ability of political parties and special interest groups to run so-called 'issue ads' during certain segments of campaigns have a similar effect. While one effect of reform might be to increase the number of viable candidates, tangible limits are placed on the speech of all candidates.
Campaign finance reform gives the individual donor a voice more comparable to other interests. At p...

Even the most radical campaign finance reform proposals have yet to eliminate corporate or union contributions. Short of such bans, the potential for large organizations to swamp the donations of individual voters still exists. Additionally, limitations on the voice of unions, businesses and special interest groups are another potential infringement on the rights of free speech and assembly. Who is to say that a union member’s contribution to their organization’s political action committee isn’t significant speech comparable to the individual gesture they make when they donate to a candidate themselves? It is reasonable that union members or shareholders choose to trust their leaders to use their money in order to best advance their interests.
Campaign finance reform will make elections more competitive, thus resulting in more turnover or 'fr...

There is actually more turnover in public office than some critics of the present campaign finance systems would like to admit. Retirements, scandals, and careful allocation of party resources make turnover possible under a variety of scenarios. Turnover also has significant negative effects, as critics of term limits have pointed-out. The more often new officeholders begin their jobs the steeper the 'learning curve' for a new Congress, or other legislative body becomes.
Campaign finance reform will reduce corruption in government by discouraging candidates from 'sellin...

Even after the complete elimination of contributions by groups, the temptation to bow to the wishes of special interests may remain. Additionally, pressure from within one’s own party, personal ideological commitments, and a candidate’s sense of the majority’s opinion in their district will still hold enormous influence on their voting record - regardless of whether the politician feels they should vote differently. The desire of many candidates to move on to higher and higher office also potentially exerts pressure on voting choices.
Reform has the effect of levelling the playing field for candidates. Candidates of enormous leaders...

Reform has the effect of levelling the playing field for candidates. Candidates of enormous leadership potential but small wallets have failed due to the lack of resources. Under a reformed campaign finance system it will be more difficult for well-financed candidates to win purely because of the money they have. Incumbent candidates have a unique advantage over challengers in the present system because of their direct connections to important sources of money.
Campaign finance reform gives the individual donor a voice more comparable to other interests. At p...

Campaign finance reform gives the individual donor a voice more comparable to other interests. At present, the enormous amount of money channelled into campaigns by large corporations, unions, and special interest groups (Political Action Committees) overwhelm the smaller, limited contributions of individual donors. Under many campaign finance proposals, limits are suggested for these large group donations. Such limits increase the significance of donations by individual voters, likely increasing the responsiveness of candidates to voters/donors and accountability. Additionally, the increased significance of individual contributions encourages voter participation and activism.
Campaign finance reform will make elections more competitive, thus resulting in more turnover or 'fr...

Campaign finance reform will make elections more competitive, thus resulting in more turnover or 'fresh blood' in politics. This is valuable in challenging old orthodoxies and bringing in new ideas. It will also make it easier for members of ethnic minorities and the working class to seek office - such groups are disproportionately deterred from candidacy by the current need to raise huge sums of money.
To invade could trigger an Arms Race: the very thing everyone wants to avoid!

If the People's Republic of China invaded North Korea it could trigger a arms race in the region and a build up of tension, the very thing that security experts are worrying could happen. Already more hawkish elements in Japan are saying that Japan should develop nuclear weapons something that could be exacerbated. If China invaded North Korea alone or in tandem with Communist leaning allies (like Laos or maybe Vietnam) this could worry other countries including the other nearby regional power India which is a country that already has nuclear weapons and has territorial disputes with China.