DoJ - Making Data Public Would 'Crash System'

orthogonal writes "The Justice Department today denied Freedom of Information Act requests to make public data on foreign lobbyists, claiming that '[i]mplementing such a request risks a crash that cannot be fixed and could result in a major loss of data, which would be devastating'. The requestor responded that '[t]his was a new one on us. We weren't aware there were databases that could be destroyed just by copying them,' Bob Williams of the Center for Public Integrity said Tuesday. Maybe we should tell John Ashcroft about open source database and copying solutions?"

Comments

Most likely irrelevant anecdote

[Jokkey]

One of my Linux machines is currently suffering from some substandard SCSI equipment and some DMA problems on one of the hard drive controllers; until I can schedule the downtime for software upgrades and hardware troubleshooting, I'm leaving things the way they are. As long as that's the case, the system mostly works, but certain disk-intensive operations (such as searching hundreds of MB of logs) degrade performance enough to make the system nearly unusable.

I doubt that this is terribly relevant to the computing problems experienced by massive government databases, but I can at least conceive of how a "mass export of all stored images" (to quote the article) could significantly interfere with the database's everyday usage on a sufficiently poorly-designed/maintained/updated system.

The article also states that the government plans on having the upgrades completed, and the data available, by December. (I'm not going to touch the issue of how accurate this statement is.)

lies & excuses

[__aaitqo8496]

it's all just another lie told to us by our government. it's nothing new, but i think this republican majority government is realizing that all this access to information is not beneficial to the government powers which widely conflict civil liberties.

it seems they've simply given up and just make up blantant lies which are served to the american public as excuses.

Resign, Mr. Ashcroft

[Randym]

Under looser policies issued in 1993, agencies could hold back information to prevent "foreseeable harm."

I hereby call for the resignation of John Ashcroft on the grounds that his ineptitude in responding to legitimate FOIA requests clearly causes "forseeable harm" to American democracy.

Not to mention that the excuse he gave is *not* one of the reasons permitted to be cited by the government to avoid giving us -- the American people, who paid for it all -- *our* information.

Mr. Ashcroft is from Missouri, the "Show Me" state. Tell me, Mr. Ashcroft: what part of "Show me the public records" do you not understand?

Re:Resign, Mr. Ashcroft

[multiplexo]

If you're referring to the fact that Ashcroft as AG might be revenge on the Democrats for playing dirty and getting Jean Carnahan to replace her husband Mel then you're probably right, although he seems like revenge on the rest of us as well. So much for Democratic perfidy, although what if Ashcroft, who is detested by all liberals and a lot of conservatives helps to drag Bush down in 2004? Could this be construed as part of a Democratic ueber-master strategy?

You're missing my point though, any incumbent senator who's worth a shit should be able to crush a competitor like a bug in a vise, especially a dead one, even the dead one's widow trying to get into office on a sympathy vote. Hell, look at senators such as Scoop Jackson, Strom Thurmond, Lyndon Johnson or Jesse Helms. Those guys wouldn't have had any problem smacking Jean Carnahan down, despite whatever sympathy vote her dead husband was worth. Lyndon Johnson probably would have ended up winning the election and fucking her. Scoop Jackson would have won that election and sold Boeing aircraft to the state of Missouri and Thurmond or Helms could have won that election and gotten the MIssouri schools resegregated (which wouldn't take that much work, but still).

Causality loop (not a Star Trek reference)

[Hamster Lover]

How do they know that the records will be destroyed by accessing them? Have they accessed the records already and destroyed them?

More importantly, if they can "fix" the records in time for December, by their logic, wouldn't this process endanger the records from destruction in the first place?

Only government would pull a paradox out of its ass as an excuse.

Regime Change

[Java Ape]

Frankly, I'm sick of the rampant hypocracy of the "United Corporate States of America" and our war on freedom. Worse, the battle's already lost.

I've written enough letters to my congresscritters that the probably have me filed under "wacko" in several different categories. Their replies show a polite distain for my pitiful rights and nearly-useless vote.

Knowledge is power, and those in power are determined that we lemmings be kept ignorant of the the deeds done in our name for our own good. The only thing more dependable than finding our representatives have sold us down the river for personal profit, is that keeping such dealings quiet is a matter of national security. After all, if all the little lemmings figured out they were being cheerfully led over a cliff they might not follow so blindly. Computer malfunction my arse. I work as an Oracle DBA -- if I EVER responded to a request for data this way I'd be canned on the spot, and rightly so. Somehow, I doubt anyone is suddenly unemployed at the justice department.

Personally, I'm beyond disgusted. I'm voting again EVERY encumbent, since I don't think there's a human being in office worth the air they breath. Maybe if everyone voted against all incumbents for a decade or so we'd flush the professional policiticians out and take back our country.

On the other hand, I'm seriously considering emigration to a land where freedom means something, like Russia!

Re:ow my jaw!

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

Sheesh, people, if you don't like the Bush administration vote for someone else in November. Let's quit with the conspiracy crap.

You want conspiracy theories? How about the fact that the database will be publicly available, but "an overhaul of the system should be finished by December" -- conveniently after the election. Hmmm. I wonder why the Bush-Cheney administration might want foreign connections quiet until after Nov 2? Can you say "Saudi Arabia"?

Now, most likely, this is some technical thing not directed by the White House or even Ashcroft. But this has been an administration with a proven track record of stonewalling, hedging, and obfuscating for political purposes ... they simply don't have any benefit of the doubt left.

Re:Administration marked by lack of transparency

[CoitusRex]

In this light the following quote from Bush, in response to Bob Woodward asking if the president explained his positions, is not surprising at all:

Of course not. I'm the commander. See, I don't have to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation.

Florida

[dpilot]

Florida pulled a really fast one on the entire nation. While everyone was talking about hanging chads, dimpled chads, and killer-ninja chads, we missed the real point. The chads made a few thousand votes indeterminate.

But we got so caught up in them that we missed the 10's of thousands of black voters who were erroneously classified as felons and denied their right to vote. It's a simple search on Google to see some things about it, and the classification was done in what appeared to be a deliberately incompetent manner.

So maybe the electronic voting machines will be used to throw the election.
Or maybe the electronic voting machines will be a smokescreen for some other shenanigans.
Or maybe we're all seeing conspiracies where there are none.