Slashdot Mirror
Science Editors Urge Nondisclosure Of Bioterror Info
Jeraph Mason writes "According to this story on ABC news, science editors want to censor their publications because terrorists may use them. It's the same argument used to prevent security disclosures from being published." There's also coverage on the BBC and at The Washington Post.
No, the journals have a joint interest with the government here. Both would like to avoid the transfer of academic discourse from the channels that can be controlled to the Internet.
The government is concerned about every publication that prints dissident views. They have tried repeatedly to stop Ted Postol at MIT from telling people that missile defense is based on junk science and blatant lies.
The science journals are worried that their readership is starting to realise that the journal system is a racket. The authors pay to get published, they edit the journals for free and then their universities pay a fortune to get highly restricted access to the information.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Nobody ever considers that maybe they don't know everything. Nobody stops and realizes that they don't fully understand the material that the writers want to censor (in this case). In fact, I'm not yet convinced that most /. posters aren't just rudimentary AI routines. Responses to posts containing the word "censor" are typically replied to with "CENSORSHIP, BAAAD!", and the withholding of a couple of science articles will, of course, drag all scientific progress to a total screeching halt.