Slashdot Mirror


Obama Releases National Strategy For Information Sharing

wiredmikey writes "President Obama on Wednesday released a national strategy designed to balance the sharing of information with those who need it to keep the country safe, while protecting the same data from those who would use it to cause harm. 'The National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding' outlines how the government will attempt to responsibly share and protect data that enhances national security and protects the American people. The national strategy will define how the federal government and its assorted departments and agencies share their data. Agencies can also share services and work towards data and network interoperability to be more efficient, the President said. The President aimed to address concerns over Privacy by noting, 'This strategy makes it clear that the individual privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of United States persons must be — and will be — protected.' The full document is available here in PDF format from the White House website."

13 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Finally Government Transparency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding' outlines how the government will attempt to responsibly share and protect data that enhances national security and protects the American people...The President aimed to address concerns over Privacy by noting, 'This strategy makes it clear that the individual privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of United States persons must be â" and will be â" protected.'

    Great. That means we will never need to use Wikileaks again because the government will from now on share information with its people, and protect human rights.

    This is a great sigh of relief to people like Julian Assange, Private Bradley Manning and those who respect their leadership and courage to share information about what their government is up to. Finally we get transparency in government while at the same time the average citizen will be free from unwarranted and ubiquitous surveillance.

    This almost seems to good to be true. It almost seems as if I'm dreaming. It doesn't seem real: A government we can trust.

    1. Re:Finally Government Transparency by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a great sigh of relief to people like Julian Assange, Private Bradley Manning and those who respect their leadership and courage to share information about what their government is up to.

      Ah, yes, I am sure there are directives in there about no longer hounding Assange, no longer blocking Wikileaks donations and letting Manning off for the inhumane treatment he suffered. No?

      This wouldn't be coming from the same President Obama who publicly declared Manning to be guilty long before any trial?

    2. Re:Finally Government Transparency by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 3, Funny

      Racist!

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    3. Re:Finally Government Transparency by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Informative

      Re: "keep the country safe"

      The people we most need to keep the country safe from are the ones setting these policies. I hope they have OUR best interests at heart.

      --
      No sig today...
  2. Oh damn by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Funny

    They are going to use MS Sharepoint, aren't they ?

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  3. Bullshit. by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

    "individual privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of United States persons must be — and will be — protected"

    Yeah, right. This coming from the alleged constitutional law professor who signed the PATRIOT act extension.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Bullshit. by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, right. This coming from the alleged constitutional law professor who signed the PATRIOT act extension.

      Not to mention personally signing off on people who were put on a "kill list". It is so very surreal, what goes on nowdays.

  4. Ironic, aint it? by Cornwallis · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Senate is about to vote on an extension of the controversial FISA Amendments Act -- the unconstitutional law that allows the NSA to spy on Americans speaking to people abroad without a warrant. Yet you wouldn't know it by watching CSPAN because the Senate isn't debating it.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/12/senate-wants-sneak-warrantless-spying-bill-extension-law-without-debate-lets-call

    1. Re:Ironic, aint it? by Mitreya · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Senate is about to vote on an extension of the controversial FISA Amendments Act -- the unconstitutional law that allows the NSA to spy on Americans speaking to people abroad without a warrant. Yet you wouldn't know it by watching CSPAN because the Senate isn't debating it.

      Why would they debate it? Both sides agree on every single military/security-related issue at this point.

      The presidential debates were so interesting, with Obama and Romney competing to see who likes military drones more or who will promise to bomb more countries (Romney wins on that one, but not by much).

    2. Re:Ironic, aint it? by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is Obama's true genius he knows how to use new speak, better than anyone. He talks peace, but if anything is quicker to use a "kinetic military action" than even GWB was and does it with less congressional oversight.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  5. Information sharing, government version by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your information is our information, and my information is only mine, no matter where in the world you are.

  6. There Is No Real Privacy Anymore. by smpoole7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If information can be gathered, it will be. If laws are passed to restrict access to it, people will find ways around the laws and/or just plain break the law when they want to. This is true in both the public and private sectors.

    Whether it's websites that find new ways to track everywhere you browse, or government boffins who want to know what you eat for breakfast and how often you have sex, they ARE going to get that information. The technology exists now to do it, so they WILL do it.

    What should TERRIFY all of us -- without exception -- is the way this is being handled, both in the private and public sectors: "we will gather the info, but we promise not to abuse it and we will restrict access to it."

    Folks, that ain't gonna happen. People are people. Crooks are crooks and curiosity kills every time.

    Perfect example and please don't take this the wrong way. I'm NOT trying to restart the old debate about healthcare in the US. But I have to admit that it has puzzled me that some of the same people who scream about businesses tracking everything we do, don't say a word about the FACT that the Affordable Health Care Act creates one of the largest, most invasive and complete databases of health information that has ever existed.

    And our protection? The same thing you see here. "We promise not to abuse this goldmine of information in any way. We're the government and we're here to help. Trust us."

    Do you REALLY believe that, in a tight election, juicy tidbits aren't going to magically "slip" out about some challenger's medical history?

    I don't know what the answer is. But if you begin to understand that there is no real expectation of privacy anymore, you're at least headed in the right direction.

    --
    Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
  7. Double-Plus Good, Comrade! by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    'This strategy makes it clear that the individual privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of United States persons must be â" and will be â" protected.'

    I mean, really...can this statement possibly be any more Orwellian?

    They've got to realize how totally full of shit that statement sounds, even to someone with no dog in the fight. I refuse to believe they are so clueless as to believe that statement does anything but incite and fan the flames of distrust and hostility.

    It's like they're trying to get people to start a rebellion, so they'll have an excuse to declare martial law and roll the Hellfire-equipped drones, checkpoints, and armor out on the general population.

    It would certainly be ironic if US citizens end up being saved from tyranny not by elections, rebellion, or the judicial system, but by Iran or N. Korea nuking Washington, D.C. either by ICBM or by a smuggled-in device.

    Personally, if I were a D.C. resident and accidentally learned of such a plot, either to nuke D.C. and/or to assassinate top government leaders, I'd quietly leave town and keep my mouth shut. And that really hurts me to have to say about my own nation's government and it's leaders. But sadly, it and they have become everything that the US has fought politically and waged wars against for over 100 years.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.