Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality

["Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>]

>Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
>> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop
>> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than
>> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that
>> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through
>> the open literature.
>
>Why limit your annoyance to government scientists?  Scientists
>in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.)
>algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets.
>Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science
>anyway by offering patent protection. 

a patent is not at all the same as a secrecy order issued by
the NSA, and shame on you for suggesting so. we both know you
are far more intelligent than this, and this is a feeble
argument.

how can you possibly compare the two cases? in one case, there
is no knowledge whatsoever allowed to leak from a government
agency. in the other case, the patent is published in a 
government forum for searching by anyone. there is no SECRECY
in a patent, it in fact is a PUBLIC DECLARATION OF OWNERSHIP
supported by a DISCLOSURE system. the NSA and all secret
agencies are fundamentally ANTI DISCLOSURE and use their
supposed claims of NATIONAL SECURITY to EVADE ACCOUNTABILITY
TO THE PUBLIC and even the namby-pamby, gutless, souless
BUREACRATS in congress.

Jim G., how many scientists are now working on government
WEAPONRY programs? how much money of taxes is being funneled
to them? and you compare them with private sector scientists
who are scrounging to make ends meet in this twisted con game
we call the modern economy? Chomsky is right, its WELFARE FOR
BUSINESS via vast subsidies to the so-called "defense" industry.
its nothing but WAR TOYS FOR WAR MONGERS.

 You don't make money by
>giving away your intellectual capital.  Seems to me that schools
>and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only
>ones who don't merit your censure on this count.

what does this have to do with the NSA or weapons development,
to which I was referring to in my essay?  neither has anything
to do with making money, and quite frankly I'm ashamed that
someone as intelligent as you would suggest there is any
similarity.

you're using one of the most feeble arguments in the world.
two wrongs do not make a right. "those darn scientists in
private industry are into secrecy too. secrecy is a basic
part of life on planet earth". perhaps so, but secrecy in
GOVERNMENT is ANTITHETICAL to freedom, and there is a
direct proportion of the INCREASE IN SECRECY to the
INCREASE IN TYRANNY.

sorry to RANT but your post makes my blood boil. feel free
to have your deluded fantasies in private, but if you post, I'll
rant.

gosh,  JimmyG, have you read about how area 51 was charged
with a lawsuit for burning toxic wastes by the widow
of a dead employee? would you like me to post it for you?
do you hold this up as an example of government accountability?
or is it in fact government that no longer serves the people?
a government that in fact is in total contempt of its citizens?
food for thought, eh? I suppose it would make anyone with 
a conscience tend to THINK-- presuming they really have one.
its a rare quality in these times, don't you think, JimmyG?