If all that you say is true, then why bother having any kind of system for the classification of any information.
Everything should be published. Obama's travel schedule/routes, secret codes, locations, troop movements, etc. Everything. Because if someone can decide to leak something, for any reason at all, then anyone can leak anything.
But then, it's all for the greater good eh?
What you seem to be saying is that, if there is an opportunity to make an information leak and be published, most people would leak information and an organization would publish anything.
I think what you are trying to say is that sensitive information about important people and events should not always be published.
Lets assume that it would for the moment. What happens then, both good and bad? - The information is in a centralized, publicly known place and the leak is known.
* A general would realize that there is a leak - a potential security breach - and tighten security
* The secret service might change plans
* Codes would be changed.
* Execs could know someone is on to them, and destroy documents.
* Interal organization witch hunts to route out the leaker
If you are going to badmouth one solution to the problem of high level corruption, it is incumbent on you to propose a better solution. Or maybe, you simply don't consider it a problem. I happen to.
I agree with you whole heartedly. I think the novel was set up to preclude any real redemtion. People behaved so predictably they were mechanisms and IMHO redemtion requires internal growth and change. It was like watching a chess match where both sides were played by a simple chess program.
I admit I enjoyed it at first, but in the end it was like eating a meal that gives one heartburn and gas.
If I were to go out into the street with a megaphone at 3 am and yell random, annoying things, I would soon be arrested for disturbing the peace. There are laws against being annoying.
Those laws would seem to butt heads with laws protecting freedom of expression, but there are clear cases when a person is merely being annoying and cases where a person clearly is speaking out. The weaknesses of law show through in the edge cases.
Forging an email address to send spam is clearly not an edge case. The interesting cases will be bulk mailings by political partisans.
The laws are written not because of some philosophic ramblings, but because people want them there in order to live comfortable orderly lives.
People use gas mileage as an excuse to pick on SUVs.
People hate SUVs because they block visibility on the road. The new SUVs often have televisions that distract the driver behind them. They are more likely to be full of kids and thus, often have distracted drivers.
Many people consider them to be the most obnoxious things to drive near.
Good or bad, this will make this branch of the govt more efficient. Look at the DMV - now that it is computerized and automated, it is a hell of a lot less awful than it was 15 years ago. I can download all the forms I need online and mail them in.
That just shows me that it is possible to improve the government through technology.
_____________________________________________
______{Irresponsible Cybernetics}_______
"we bring *things* to life"
Feed the
GRU
TV is dead for me as well. The fight over the broadcast spectrum is going to be moot, when technology allows infinite channels.
The bulk of money to make programs comes from advertisers. The production costs are going down, way down, but the shows still need money to be made. Excpect to see more product placement.
Slashdot Mirror
First we have furries. Now we'll have bosies!
If all that you say is true, then why bother having any kind of system for the classification of any information.
Everything should be published. Obama's travel schedule/routes, secret codes, locations, troop movements, etc. Everything. Because if someone can decide to leak something, for any reason at all, then anyone can leak anything.
But then, it's all for the greater good eh?
What you seem to be saying is that, if there is an opportunity to make an information leak and be published, most people would leak information and an organization would publish anything.
I think what you are trying to say is that sensitive information about important people and events should not always be published.
Lets assume that it would for the moment. What happens then, both good and bad?
- The information is in a centralized, publicly known place and the leak is known.
* A general would realize that there is a leak - a potential security breach - and tighten security
* The secret service might change plans
* Codes would be changed.
* Execs could know someone is on to them, and destroy documents.
* Interal organization witch hunts to route out the leaker
If you are going to badmouth one solution to the problem of high level corruption, it is incumbent on you to propose a better solution. Or maybe, you simply don't consider it a problem. I happen to.
I agree with you whole heartedly. I think the novel was set up to preclude any real redemtion. People behaved so predictably they were mechanisms and IMHO redemtion requires internal growth and change. It was like watching a chess match where both sides were played by a simple chess program.
I admit I enjoyed it at first, but in the end it was like eating a meal that gives one heartburn and gas.
1) Adding engineers to a software project only makes it later
2) Dueling projects. The more politically powerfull will win
They mean, seen in the biblical sense!
If I were to go out into the street with a megaphone at 3 am and yell random, annoying things, I would soon be arrested for disturbing the peace. There are laws against being annoying.
Those laws would seem to butt heads with laws protecting freedom of expression, but there are clear cases when a person is merely being annoying and cases where a person clearly is speaking out. The weaknesses of law show through in the edge cases.
Forging an email address to send spam is clearly not an edge case. The interesting cases will be bulk mailings by political partisans.
The laws are written not because of some philosophic ramblings, but because people want them there in order to live comfortable orderly lives.
People use gas mileage as an excuse to pick on SUVs.
People hate SUVs because they block visibility on the road. The new SUVs often have televisions that distract the driver behind them. They are more likely to be full of kids and thus, often have distracted drivers.
Many people consider them to be the most obnoxious things to drive near.
I read that at ET first off.
0.024 deg C a year represents a huge amount of energy.
In the oceans alone, that is about 24 thousand peta-joules of
energy.
What does that mean? It's just a number. I don't know the significance of it, but I couldn't dismiss it offhand.
I would think that newspapers and radio are a good way to be fully current.
I don't think up-to-the-minute news coverage really ads any value to my life. It's usually not even entertaining.
Good or bad, this will make this branch of the govt more efficient. Look at the DMV - now that it is computerized and automated, it is a hell of a lot less awful than it was 15 years ago. I can download all the forms I need online and mail them in. That just shows me that it is possible to improve the government through technology. _____________________________________________ ______{Irresponsible Cybernetics}_______ "we bring *things* to life" Feed the GRU
It's been around a while.
TV is dead for me as well. The fight over the broadcast spectrum is going to be moot, when technology allows infinite channels.
The bulk of money to make programs comes from advertisers. The production costs are going down, way down, but the shows still need money to be made. Excpect to see more product placement.
Personally I prefer plays, but product placements are cropping up there, too.