Funny you mentioned that, I was thinking the same thing when I read the article.
I agree with things needing to be considered "sensitive but unclassified" when they are associated with governmental proceedings and plans etc. but I can't say I see the point in doing this with scientific papers primarily because I don't think other countries are going to stop publishing theirs. Whether an American scientist publishes a paper or not, would-be bioterrorists _will_ find a way to do harm. I can't say I see it as a disservice to the human population (nor to other scientists, assuming they still have access to these papers) but I do consider it ethically wrong to censor it.
Slashdot Mirror
95% of people will be unemployed and homeless after the lethal combination of genetic fingerprinting and Googling.
Funny you mentioned that, I was thinking the same thing when I read the article.
I agree with things needing to be considered "sensitive but unclassified" when they are associated with governmental proceedings and plans etc. but I can't say I see the point in doing this with scientific papers primarily because I don't think other countries are going to stop publishing theirs. Whether an American scientist publishes a paper or not, would-be bioterrorists _will_ find a way to do harm. I can't say I see it as a disservice to the human population (nor to other scientists, assuming they still have access to these papers) but I do consider it ethically wrong to censor it.