5 ms·

It's a little weird to think that just 60 years ago you could be forbidden from publishing about findings related to rain. It falls in your own back yard, but y

It's a little weird to think that just 60 years ago you could be forbidden from publishing about findings related to rain. It falls in your own back yard, but you aren't allowed to study it or tell other people about it.

njarboe 9y ago
It would be interesting to look at a list what is forbidden from being publishing in the US today. Maybe it is forbidden to publish such a list.
- kurthr 9y ago
  Start taking pictures of policemen in your local area, especially near the station. I'm sure they will provide a guide to publishing... Really, on a larger scale, is there much shock that reporting on top secret weapons research topics will get you in trouble? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-17/local/me-607_1_spy-plane http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-17/local/me-607_1_spy-pl...
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    In the case of nuclear weapons specifically, it actually was a shock when the US tried to enforce the "born secret" doctrine (which said that information about weapon design and mechanics -- even if figured out from nothing but public, non-classified sources -- would automatically become classified as of the moment the person figured it out). See US v. Progressive for the details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_.... Amusingly, the argument was made -- and made seriously -- that the mere fact that the government had pursued the case was a leak of "born secret" information, since the attempt to suppress the information was tacitly an acknowledgment that it was correct (since incorrect information would not be subject to "born secret").
    - kurthr 9y ago
      Sonoluminescence research was made substantially more difficult, because most of the modeling codes for collapsing plasmas were considered innapropriate to civiliian research... or so I have heard.
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    >Start taking pictures of policemen in your local area, especially near the station. I'm sure they will provide a guide to publishing... You are allowed to photograph and film the police in public. Every US appeals court that has considered the issue has so ruled. It's possible that one of the circuits that has not considered the issue could rule the other way, but that seems unlikely.
    - kurthr 9y ago
      I totally agree and support that, but you will suffer for doing it. I'm sorry.
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  Almost nothing is forbidden. Security classifications apply only to those entrusted with legal access to classified information. Once the information leaks out[1], private citizens are free to publish it. The exception is information related to nuclear weapons. That is Restricted Data, as opposed to classified, and is 'born secret.' It is forbidden to publish even if you independently discover it[2]. This has never been fully tested in the courts and many say it wouldn't stand up to judicial scrutiny, but I'm not so sure. The Constitution is not a suicide pact, and publishing information that can lead to the development of the most dangerous weapons known to man does not seem like the kind of thing that freedom of speech exists to protect. [1] Certainly a crime for the leaker, but maybe also for the receiver if they provided material support for the act of leaking. I believe that is the theory for indicting Assange. [2] You would of course have to know that you are not to publish such data. Presumably either because it is obvious (e.g. the plans for a nuclear bomb) or because you were told by a government official.
- HarryHirsch 9y ago
  They'll tell you, once you have happened upon it: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/crypt.html https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/crypt.html
Buge 9y ago
Less than 20 years ago it was forbidden to publish a program that used a key longer than 40 bits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars
- dhimes 9y ago
  Your still forbidden from doing whatever you please with the electromagnetic radiation that somebody else spews at your property.
  - dhimes 9y ago
    s/Your/You're/ egads...

njarboe 9y ago

It would be interesting to look at a list what is forbidden from being publishing in the US today. Maybe it is forbidden to publish such a list.

kurthr 9y ago
Start taking pictures of policemen in your local area, especially near the station. I'm sure they will provide a guide to publishing... Really, on a larger scale, is there much shock that reporting on top secret weapons research topics will get you in trouble? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-17/local/me-607_1_spy-plane http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-17/local/me-607_1_spy-pl...
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  In the case of nuclear weapons specifically, it actually was a shock when the US tried to enforce the "born secret" doctrine (which said that information about weapon design and mechanics -- even if figured out from nothing but public, non-classified sources -- would automatically become classified as of the moment the person figured it out). See US v. Progressive for the details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_.... Amusingly, the argument was made -- and made seriously -- that the mere fact that the government had pursued the case was a leak of "born secret" information, since the attempt to suppress the information was tacitly an acknowledgment that it was correct (since incorrect information would not be subject to "born secret").
  - kurthr 9y ago
    Sonoluminescence research was made substantially more difficult, because most of the modeling codes for collapsing plasmas were considered innapropriate to civiliian research... or so I have heard.
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  >Start taking pictures of policemen in your local area, especially near the station. I'm sure they will provide a guide to publishing... You are allowed to photograph and film the police in public. Every US appeals court that has considered the issue has so ruled. It's possible that one of the circuits that has not considered the issue could rule the other way, but that seems unlikely.
  - kurthr 9y ago
    I totally agree and support that, but you will suffer for doing it. I'm sorry.
marcoperaza 9y ago
Almost nothing is forbidden. Security classifications apply only to those entrusted with legal access to classified information. Once the information leaks out[1], private citizens are free to publish it. The exception is information related to nuclear weapons. That is Restricted Data, as opposed to classified, and is 'born secret.' It is forbidden to publish even if you independently discover it[2]. This has never been fully tested in the courts and many say it wouldn't stand up to judicial scrutiny, but I'm not so sure. The Constitution is not a suicide pact, and publishing information that can lead to the development of the most dangerous weapons known to man does not seem like the kind of thing that freedom of speech exists to protect. [1] Certainly a crime for the leaker, but maybe also for the receiver if they provided material support for the act of leaking. I believe that is the theory for indicting Assange. [2] You would of course have to know that you are not to publish such data. Presumably either because it is obvious (e.g. the plans for a nuclear bomb) or because you were told by a government official.
HarryHirsch 9y ago
They'll tell you, once you have happened upon it: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/crypt.html https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/crypt.html

Buge 9y ago

Less than 20 years ago it was forbidden to publish a program that used a key longer than 40 bits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars

dhimes 9y ago
Your still forbidden from doing whatever you please with the electromagnetic radiation that somebody else spews at your property.
- dhimes 9y ago
  s/Your/You're/ egads...