What is Wikileaks hoping to achieve?

I am not sure what Wikileaks is trying to achieve here by emptying the diplomatic bag (see here for typical meedja peek-a-boo), in terms of cost/benefits.

As Shefaly puts it, in terms of the benefits "The leaks reveal the obvious about nations, confirming stereotypes of bullies the world over. What else?"

What worries me is the costs.

What do Assange & Co think these organisations are supposed to do when they are trying to honestly evaluate issues - wrap them up in fluff-speak?. There is shedding light in dark places to root out corruption, and there is opening up stuff that stops people who are trying to help you.

I suggest Wikileaks needs to be able to discern the difference PDQ or we are all going to suffer, as I cannot see the governments of the world allowing these sorts of data to be leaked ad infinitum, and a lot of good stuff will be lost if they do crack down. Doing the former is a major boon, doing the latter makes them a risk.

For people who believe in an open, neutral internet this sort of stuff is an own goal, as it gives increasing ammunition to those who would gag the 'Net, and makes it harder for the 'Net's friends to defend it.

The 'Net is a technology, usable for good or ill - and heaven knows there are enough people trying to use it for ill already without these guys playing into the hands of the Nay-Sayers in the corridors of power.

With power comes responsibility, use it or we shall most surely all lose it.

Update - This article - titled "US embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment" from Grauniad journo Simon Jenkins in my opinion shows the inability of the "all data must be free" extreme fraternity to differentiate between exposing data for public interest and exposing data as an irresponsible act for private profit.

This reminds me of the action of bovver boys in perfectly respectable protests (take the latest one on tuition fees) - the activities of a few hotheads who take it too far compromise the aims of the protest and alienate the majority who otherwise would support it.

Protecting privacy in the 'Net age is a hard enough act to master without this sort of irresponsible, ill-considered stirring. People who actually understand how the 'Net works know that public net neutrality and open-ness is a delicate thing and not an automatic outcome. What do these guys think (I use the word loosely) the outcome is going to be here?