On the way in to work this morning, I heard a news story on NPR. The topic was the fact that as scientific knowledge expands and is disseminated, the possibilities of someone using that information for nefarious purposes increases. Therefore, the scientific community is being pressured not to release data on certain subjects, not to research certain areas, and not to publish the findings resulting from, potentially, years of study. The pressure comes in the form of a threat that, if "the scientific community"--as if it were a unified whole--cannot come up with a reasonable self-regulation to keep theoretically exploitable discoveries from falling into the wrong hands, then the government would have to intervene and do it for them.
One example they gave involved a study on weaknesses in the modern American agricultural infrastructure, which had been commisioned by the USDA back when the world made sense. When the report was done, the researchers were told not to put it out into public view because,"It read like a blueprint for terrorists."
Another example was an immunologist whose paper on the structure and nature of virii was locked away because some of the work partially described the smallpox virus. Nevermind how much good her work might be to other medical researchers who might find new ways to combat virii. No, we must keep that information from terrorists who could use it to make smallpox and KILL US ALL!!!!!
I cannot put into words how angry this makes me. And yet that won't stop me from typing. Yes, every advance ever made by science has the potential to be used for destructive ends. Gunpowder leads to bullets; electricity leads to testicular electrocution; flight leads to things flying into other things at great speed and altitude; the internet leads to spam. Anything can be twisted into something harmful if someone is willing to sit down and figure out how to do it. That does not mean we stop churning out new good ideas simply to dry up the well for the crazy, evil fucks of the world.
But that's not even the aspect of the story that boiled my blood. This is. The American scientific establishment is being urged to censor itself. If they fail to do so as well as some branch of the government thinks they should, then they might be censored from the outside. Scientists, people whose sole purpose is to generate and test new ideas, are being told not to have certain ideas, or at the very least not tell anyone about it if they do.
This is one step away from anti-intellectualism, from seeing every "smart guy" as a potential threat to The People, a threat that is easier to eliminate than people in other countries who actually want to do the nation harm because the intellectuals are right here among us, and tend to be out of shape and easily winded. Plus, they're easy to spot, with their thick glasses and lack of social skills. So, why not just get rid of them and de-fang the true villains by proxy? And anyone who looks like he might be one of them, just to be on the safe side.
But, maybe I'm just bitter because I'll be up against the wall when the pogroms come. I hope they at least get the symbolism right and go for the head shot.
faq.html does not exist.
about.html does not exist.
In my, perhaps, not so humble opinion, the post background is too dark for a black font. Also my old eyes, just recently observed the 34th anniversary of my 39th birthday, would appreciate a slightly larger font size, after the text/background contrast is improved, of course.
To compensate, rather than just go away, I copied, the post into an editor, and pumped up the font to Arial 12 much easier to read, especially on a white background. :-)>
With regard to "THEY'VE JUST GONE TOO FAR", this is really very old news. Whence came the term 'Luddite'?
The classic Luddite, was attempting to save his labor intensive job but the real complaint these folks have is that they don't want anything to change except, of course, the things that they want to change.
The worry about terrorism has nothing to do with terrorism. To the scientifically illiterate, the real terrorist is the scientist and so they simply pour old whine into a new battle and say 'So there'.
Re: Just read your post "Grouse" so I'll copy this crap out of the email and into comments, so there.
Might be an interesting post but I can't read it. Black on green? Mayhaps it would work for night crawlers.
Posted by: P. Smith at January 13, 2003 05:58 PMWhy are we afraid? Knowledge is power. We have reached this stage of evolution because of sharing knowledge. Aid to terrorists? Ridiculous.
We should never build a hundred story building because some fanatic will commandeer an airplane and smash the building and plane. WRONG!
The creations of our innate inteligence must be shared with anyone who can use them. The purpose is not the concern. The advancement of humanity is the goal.
What energy is available without greenhous gas production? Nuclear energy. How many have died or been injured ar maimed by nuclear energy? No One.
It is difficult, but face reality. Knowledge, shared and creative, has performed much good in this world.
Secrecy begets tyranny.
Posted by: Bob McNutt at January 13, 2003 06:03 PMBob offers some useful apothegms, if fully considered: Power also begets tyranny, and knowledge is power. The purpose of gained knowledge is of concern because that purpose is not always the advancement of society.
Knowledge has done good and harm. I would hope the hypothetical "smart guys" are smart enough to realize that and act accordingly. If they are not, I see no reason to consider them as acting outside of the reach of society.
Posted by: Justin Katz at January 13, 2003 06:17 PMBill, P., and Justin---WTF?
Bill, should have been an e-mail after all, or just set your browser settings to compensate. As for your moderately on-topic comment, your are correct, "they" have been saying things like this since fire was first harnessed, but recently the "they" has actually become our elected officials, mostly non-scientists with no real idea of how one idea begets another or how to apply any given idea to the world as a whole and are instead ruled by fear and ruling on the whim of this weeks public opinion poll.
P, same thing, use your browser settings.
Justin, it sounds like you are also saying that the 'smart guys' should submit to censorship, even if it is self censoring.
And Bob, I hate to mention a little thing called Chernobyl, but folks died there and have continued dying for a generation now. Not to say that I don't like nuke power, just wanted to call your attention to that one detail.
As for you David, glad to see you back and hope you are doing well. Come visit when you can.
Posted by: Blue at January 13, 2003 08:52 PMGosh, I am amazed at so many people showing up outta the blue to comment on my little raving, with no buildup or prior advertising or anything.
As for the color scheme comments, take that up with my decorator; I just work here. But, it's black on blue, so P. Smith might wanna go to the eye doctor and look at the blotchy cards with numbers on them.
Justin, anyone with an interest in pursuing the dark side of human achievement (a.k.a. better killing thru technology) will find the means to do so. Whether he does it via re-engineered smallpox or a barrel full of of Semtex and roofing nails is simply a question of technique.
It would be nice if we could progress toward enlightenment as a species without encountering that faction of ourselves that seeks to turn all our advancements into new horrors. It. Cannot. Be. Done. We can protect ourselves, OR we can move ahead. Choose one.
One final point: all knowledge gained advances society, even if just to tell us what not to do again. Not, "even," "especially." What is learned cannot be unlearned, and what is done with knowledge is not that knowledge's fault. Ideas don't kill people. People kill people.
By the way, Uncle (not mine) Bill, the "Grouse" posting was sarcastic. I do that. It's kind of a thing.
Posted by: David at January 14, 2003 12:53 AM"Gosh, I am amazed at so many people showing up outta the blue to comment on my little raving, with no buildup or prior advertising or anything."
Thank INSTAPUNDIT. I tend to follow his links, since I trust Glenn's taste.
Yeah, I figured it was something like that.
Posted by: David at January 14, 2003 09:03 AMThis post seems a little hysterical to me.
It also seems like you're conflating the basic sciences with engineering. Basic science would include stuff like the properties of U-235, what its decay products are, its half-life, etc. Descriptions of things in the universe, and explanations of how those things behave and came to be. Engineering would include how to compress U-235 to critical mass, and how to assemble the necessary explosives, fuses, timers, etc. for this process.
I don't think there's any reason why basic science information shouldn't be publicly available, and I can't think of any reason why engineering information should be. Obviously, some things are going to fall into a gray area, or contain bits of both kinds of information. I think it's reasonable, given the current state of the world, to ask scientists and engineers to act responsibly when it comes to disseminating engineering-type information that could be useful to terrorists who want to build horrible weapons (as opposed to terrorists who just want to learn physics).
I think that taking a slippery slope from that into, "Let's kill all the smart people," is batty.
Posted by: DTLV at January 14, 2003 01:45 PMAll right, it seems I must elaborate. Someday, someone is going to use some relatively new technology to perform some horrific act upon his fellow man. People will be outraged. As we have seen recently, that outrage will not be directed only at the perpetrators, but also at the people who made his new technique available. Secrecy cannot be absolute, so it must happen eventually.
Some people (the reasonable sorts) will understand that the people who came up with the breakthrough never intended it to be perverted as it will have been. Everyone else (the insensate mob) will want to punish someone, anyone, for the transgression.
If you doubt my logic up to this point, consider how many people blamed the US for having been attacked a couple autumns ago. (Late summers?)
So, the mob is out for blood. The actual villain is out of reach. His accidental enablers are standing right over there. Those guys will do until someone better comes along.
Anyone who tries to talk the mob out of its reprisals will be seen as supporting the villain and become immediately suspect, thus losing all credibility while simultaneously painting a target on themselves. Anyone who speaks up shares the fate the mob intends for its original target. Soon, no one speaks up anymore.
But wait! There's more. Soon, the mob runs out of targets, but not momentum. They need to keep going after someone, if only to justify to themselves having gone after all those other people. So, they turn on people who just remind them of their erstwhile targets.
I have just described mob mentality. This is the mechanism of lynch mobs, the Salem witch trials, the Reign of Terror, and McCarthyism.
None of which was my actual point. I just thought I needed to explain my thought process.
Posted by: David at January 15, 2003 09:39 AM