What is Digg?26 Comments
- ohmdiggity, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13This is sad. Free information is vital to a free economy and society.
- colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7God forbid anyone steal information that could probably be found on the internet on our 60 year old weapons technology.
- xobecide, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6"Hey Bush Light, this is Ted from yale... I knows this guy who will TOTALLY be awesome for that National lab place."
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Better for them to be blocking access untill they review the policy then to just open up the archives for anyone to see. I mean, this isnt your local library we're talking about, this is the place where americas nukes are engineered.
- Rosco, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Good, some things need to remain in the black. Free information is a good thing in most circumstances, but what they do in Los Alamos needs to be under very strict control.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Good job. Another "private contractor" that's making things better. Just like they did at Walter Reed, in Iraq, and New Orleans.
Just tell me that the guy heading the company they picked wasn't friends with one of Bush's college drinking buddies or anything... - DjDimitrious, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@sillyrabbits
>>> the freedom of information act has gone way too far.
I disagree. It hasn't gone far enough. - djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Most people here won't understand that though. Like the saying goes, "Common sense...isn't."
- xister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just a quick search revealed this:
Last year Bechtel, the University of California, BWX Technologies, and Washington Group International came together as Los Alamos National Security, LLC.,
"Partnership that holds the contract to manage LANL. Partners are Bechtel, University of California, BWX Technologies, and Washington Group International."
http://lansllc.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"U.S. construction firms bidding on a lucrative government contract ($900-million) to rebuild a postwar Iraq.
Contributed a combined $2.8 million—68 percent to Republicans—over the past two election cycles.
Chart of donations to the election campaign
Bechtel Group Inc..
Fluor Corp.
Halliburton Co.
Kellogg, Brown & Root
Louis Berger Group Inc
Parsons Corp.
Carlyle Group
Bechtel was among 24 U.S. companies that supplied Iraq with weapons during the '80s.
http://www.greatdreams.com/political/bechtel.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny that the company now in charge of Los Alamos has been supplying the Middle East with weapons. We don't have to worry about terrorists coming over here to get our weapons secrets when we'll be shipping the product to them. It's also clear why it's closed to researchers now too; close ties to the Bush administration. - AndrewWood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2sillyrabbits - "It serves little purpose to release the material since, as with most real research documents, 99.999% of the public doesn't have the background to even understand what it says, let alone determine whether it's important."
Yet the 99.999% of the public who has put funding into their research didn't all know what they were funding now did they? A company that has benefited from so much public money and time should be held accountable for it's documentation, this is a no brainer and you cannot be serious about those comments. That is, unless you are sucking on a plutonium bag and it's fried your mind.
What's next regulatory services won't have to show their tax or earning records to us? - cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No, its akin to saying that since congress provides the budget for military deployments in Iraq, they have the right to recieve regular reports on the status of the mission those funds were allocated towards. We don't need to know what kind of groceries an individual soldier is buying, we do need to know what kind of "groceries" the military command is buying, and if they are getting a good deal for the money.
- robhakari, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3FoIA doesn't apply since Los Alamos is being operated by a non-governmental agency now
- newl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@robhakari
If our taxes pay for it, we have a right to know. - DavidDigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Um... isn't the policy called the "Freedom of Information Act"? And can't you just call up some bureaucrats to form a committee to come up with a policy? I mean, this is America we're talking about. We aren't some poor 3rd world country. Hell, our bureaucrats even get ***** done, which is saying a lot considering that French bureaucrats have a conception of work that comprises 75% internet surfing, 15% flirting and 10% actual work.
Yeah, I have a problem with the French. So sue me. I didn't say I /hated/ them. - There4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0These sorts of developments frighten me deeply. Such policy changes are incubated in an atmosphere of fear and then can only be partially repealed at best. How many people know about this. How many other instances of this are there. Los Alamos does some pretty heavy military research, granted most of it is theoretical but every god damned thing designed to kill was theoretical at some point.
- raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4AGREED!
- robhakari, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1newl
thats akin to saying that since our tax money pays soldiers salaries, we should be able to know what our soldiers are spending their paycheck on - cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And what happened to the policies that were already in place before this contractor took over? The ones that maintained strict enough control to require a FOIA request be filed to access the data in the first place?
- Ecoplu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I think it is about time!!!!!!
- tomis, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3This is what happens when people place protocol above common sense. One step at a time, we are outlawing our humanity.
- djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5It's called national security. Get over it.
With so many different "organizations" trying to obtain nuclear technology, this is something that should have been done long ago. Most of you would have no idea about this though, seeing as most of you are young and naive. You go about your daily business and the rest of us will protect you. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3This is a good thing. China is trolling for information on our nuke ability to improve theirs. Not all information is safe to give away.
- Twango, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Oh dear ... they've been spending their research monies on dim-witted tarts again.
- SillyRabbits, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5Most of the research that goes on there, goes on there for a reason - the people that actually need to see those documents have access. Very few historians have a valid reason to sift through those archives. In the case of research, the freedom of information act has gone way too far. It has become a fishing expedition for foreign nationals to transfer technology inadvertently released. It serves little purpose to release the material since, as with most real research documents, 99.999% of the public doesn't have the background to even understand what it says, let alone determine whether it's important. Since most things have military applications, all it does is give other countries free boosts (and it's usually countries that aren't friendly to the US). The whole attitude of making every bit of information available to everybody in the world is a wonderful thing, is a very naive position.
- Gophergreg, on 10/12/2007, -13/+6Yeah, terrorists love it too.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is