Secrets...

[tiikki]

Those who don't know talk.

Those who know don't talk.

A friend of mine said this when we discussed about nuclear waste storage but this goes well in here too. Authors can put *CLASSIFIED* on their books, but when trying get information for game purposes one has to make guesses, educated or not.

 

[sublight_]

Because the non disclosure agreement says:

• Accepts all obligations of protecting classified information;
• Acknowledges receipt of security indoctrination. The indoctrination highlights obligations and future obligations and enforcing access and need to know;
• Is advised of implications to national security in the event of unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SAP information to those without access and need to know;
• Submits all writings for security review if they contain any SAP information or descriptions of activities related to SAP information. If the case, then the US Government responds to submission of material within a reasonable time, not to exceed 30 working days from date of receipt;
• Understands that personal repercussions for breaches of the agreement can result in termination of access, removal from a position of special confidence and trust and that the United States has mandatory prosecution for any violation;
• Accepts that all information based on access will remain the property of the United States Government; and understands that all conditions and obligations imposed by the Agreement apply when access is granted and for all time afterward.

There is no expiration date in the contract. You agree not to disclose ever.

 

[Stargazer]

I can understand the logic when a company requires such permanent silence on their projects to protect against competition... (and even then, protection of patents can only go so far). But when the funding is public, has involved millions of dollars from the taxpayer and the project is permanently shelved, speaking ought to be a civil and moral obligation, if only because the state must be accountable and liable. If money has been misused/mismanaged, it has to be known while the people involved are still around. If anyone thinks different, it means that they gladly accept for their government to conduct research with their money, perhaps make a mess of it, and never get into trouble for it. When 50-year-old programs are still under locks, it's not healthy.

 

[sublight_]

I can understand the logic when a company requires such permanent silence on their projects to protect against competition... (and even then, protection of patents can only go so far). But when the funding is public, has involved millions of dollars from the taxpayer and the project is permanently shelved, speaking ought to be a civil and moral obligation, if only because the state must be accountable and liable. If money has been misused/mismanaged, it has to be known while the people involved are still around. If anyone thinks different, it means that they gladly accept for their government to conduct research with their money, perhaps make a mess of it, and never get into trouble for it. When 50-year-old programs are still under locks, it's not healthy.

The initial rationale made sense. Imagine if you were to invent the equivalent of nuclear weapons and had a monopoly on that tech, saving it as a silver bullet. Unfortunately that mechanism became too convenient on the Pentagon side, for creating programs with very little oversight or interference. (the two could be construed as one in the same)
On the contractor side, that mechanism is anything but convenient. Ben Rich constantly lamented the baggage of special access programs as did his predecessor Kelly Johnson.

The de-classification problem has gotten so bad that not even a presidential directive can break up the log jam of classified documents stuck in limbo for decades....

 

[tiikki]

I can understand the logic when a company requires such permanent silence on their projects to protect against competition... (and even then, protection of patents can only go so far). But when the funding is public, has involved millions of dollars from the taxpayer and the project is permanently shelved, speaking ought to be a civil and moral obligation, if only because the state must be accountable and liable. If money has been misused/mismanaged, it has to be known while the people involved are still around. If anyone thinks different, it means that they gladly accept for their government to conduct research with their money, perhaps make a mess of it, and never get into trouble for it. When 50-year-old programs are still under locks, it's not healthy.

The initial rationale made sense. Imagine if you were to invent the equivalent of nuclear weapons and had a monopoly on that tech, saving it as a silver bullet. Unfortunately that mechanism became too convenient on the Pentagon side, for creating programs with very little oversight or interference. (the two could be construed as one in the same)
On the contractor side, that mechanism is anything but convenient. Ben Rich constantly lamented the baggage of special access programs as did his predecessor Kelly Johnson.

The de-classification problem has gotten so bad that not even a presidential directive can break up the log jam of classified documents stuck in limbo for decades....

From the scientific point of view biggest secret of the nukes was that they work. When it is shown given enough time the research can be duplicated as the end result has been proven. Keeping results secret only delays the others it never makes it impossible to other to repeat the results. I think that this holds for everything.

Another part is about keeping secret the failures. If failures are public then other know what not to do and they can progress faster and then there is also prestige loss from a failure.

 

[John21]

From what I've read their just doesn't seem to be both the will-power and man power to declassify millions of stuff. Have they thought of running documents through a computer program to scan for certain things that make it unreleaseable/releaseable?

 

[Stargazer]

From what I've read their just doesn't seem to be both the will-power and man power to declassify millions of stuff. Have they thought of running documents through a computer program to scan for certain things that make it unreleaseable/releaseable?

That would require for all that stuff to already be scanned so it could be OCR'd...

 

[sublight_]

From what I've read their just doesn't seem to be both the will-power and man power to declassify millions of stuff. Have they thought of running documents through a computer program to scan for certain things that make it unreleasable/releasable?

Go see this thread. Unless they change the rules again, it all has an expiration date now. A lot of this stuff is going to start spilling out into the public domain.
It doesn't cover SCI though....