U.S. Tighening Rules of Keeping Scientific Secrets 32
MobyTurbo writes: "In this article The New York Times (free registration, blah blah blah) reports that the Bush Administration is removing over 6,000 declassified documents from the public domain as part of the war on terrorism. Many scientists quoted in the article think that this will impead the development of science, especially the development of new vaccines."
whatever (Score:1, Offtopic)
Wow.. am I anal or what?
Re:whatever (Score:1)
Odd, how you caught that but not Timothy's goof. (Score:2)
=P
-Kasreyn
Re:Odd, how you caught that but not Timothy's goof (Score:1)
No, it is Tighening. Reclassifying documents was an idea suggested by actor Kevin Tighe, who (among other roles) played paramedic Roy DeSoto on "Emergency!" So they named the process after him.
Conspiracy nut : Creationists strike back! (Score:3, Interesting)
Before, they've established means for limiting insight into and influence over what they do.
Now, they wish to further strangle information so that the people able to systematically pull their schemes apart will not be able to publish their work if they do so.
Long live big brother!
Re:Conspiracy nut : Creationists strike back! (Score:1, Interesting)
This is a typical response... (Score:3, Insightful)
As long as Bush really beleives that he needs public support, he can not make decisions. The real problem I see is that Bush can't make unpopular decisions, ever. He will never do anything right as long as he tries to cater to everyone. In my book, the hallmark of a sucessful president is that he can make unpopular decisions and LEAD the populace, instead of following it. Bush has done nothing but invest in knee jerk responses to events: He labels the axis of evil so he can fufill the latent desire for revenge he has been unable to provide through the wholly half-assed, unsuccessful response to Osama Bin Laden.
Re:This is a typical response... (Score:2)
Public domain (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Public domain (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Public domain (Score:1)
The only people who are being denied access to this information are student researchers and the general public. Which is just as well, seeing as how students and the general public comprise the largest group of terrorists: MP3 pirates! Arr!
Re:Public domain (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Public domain (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Public domain (Score:3, Insightful)
That's OK, 99% of the classified information is also probably useless too ;)
The Doctor's Analysis (Score:3, Insightful)
Old Research: Passing legislation in an attempt to restrict the flow of 60 year old information is pretty hopeless. If the information has already been exposed to the public for over half a century, one can assume that terrorists already have a hold of it.
New Research: We shouldn't be worried about terrorists utilizing modern research to develop a super-mega-death bomb. Cold-War era weapons are deadly enough for a terrorist. After all, about 2000 people died on Sept. 11, while 70,000 were decimated over half a century ago by the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Re:The Doctor's Analysis (Score:1)
What are you talking about? This information has been available to the general public for over 50 years. It'd be like trying to close the source to Apache or FreeBSD - something impossible and unfeasible.
ramblings of a feeble-minded malcontent who believes that freedom must necessarily discard all protections.
I never mentioned anything about liberty or freedom. I'm just saying that this restriction won't work.
We're living in the 21st fucking century. One can assume that terrorists (a) know how to build weapons capable of inflicting mass death and (b) will use these weapons against us if they get a hold of them. We should be restricting materials needed to build these weapons rather than the knowledge to do so.
Re:Let me guess, you didn't vote Libertarian? (Score:1)
Maybe the moderator just hates being wrong. Maybe he voted for a Republicrat. This is what you reap people. If you vote for big government, you get big government. Suck it up next time and vote for freedom, vote Libertarian.
Re:Let me guess, you didn't vote Libertarian? (Score:1)
Re:Let me guess, you didn't vote Libertarian? (Score:1)
When faced with the choice between a robot and an idiot, neither is the lesser of the two evils (63 disembodied left arms can't be completely wrong)
OT:Let me guess, you didn't vote Libertarian? (Score:2)
Libertarians can be their own worst enemies. The following statement is taken from the California Official Voter Information Guide [ca.gov]. It's the statement of the Libertarian candidate for Lt. Governor:
Now, I'm a registered Libertarian. And I'm embarrassed. This guy is running for Lt. Governor, and his campaign platform is FERRETS? Hell, is website is www.ferretsanon.com [ferretsanon.com]!!! Where are the issues that most voters care about? Crime, taxes, schools, etc.? I know the LP is about reducing the size of government, but he certainly doesn't get that across. I'd be very surprised if he even comes in 3rd.
Until Libertarians stop shooting themselves in the foot like this, we will be relegated to minority status...
Take it all off (Score:2, Funny)