Slashdot Mirror
Should Taxpayers Pay Twice For Weather Data?
theodp writes "Thanks to O.M.B. Circular A-130, taxpayers now enjoy free access to SEC, Patent Office, and IRS data over the Internet. Now the Bush administration must decide whether to order the National Weather Service to make taxpayer-funded weather readings freely available on the Net, ignoring complaints from an industry trade group that doing so violates pre-Internet era agreements."
As the weather changes for the worse recently, freely available weather data could possibly save lives.
Highlighted by a recent incident where heavy rain fell, a river rose, and 700 people were evacuated at 1am in a camp ground. On the news a 10yo kid recounted how the water was ankle deep in his tent, when the family was woken for evac. Some hours later only the tent tops were visible.
The commercial weather incumbent couldnt warn these people. A camper in the internet cafe might of.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
Well, now-adays it's rarely "classified" it's just "sensitive." You see, sensitive doesn't have any accountability. You can actually get in trouble for classifying something that shouldn't have been.
Want an example of "sensitive"? Look up the Barlow case regarding the TSA. All details concerning airport security are considered "sensitive." This includes things such as "as a TSA examiner, are you encouraged to look for drugs?" (which would be illegal).
There's far more than that. Also, the FOIA compliance rate has gone way, way down under this administration. I believe the ACLU has hard numbers on that (not surprising, given how many FOIA requests they make).
An argument could be made that "sensitive isn't classified" and it would be correct, but it belies the reality that "sensitive" is effectively "classified."