6 ms·

(Sigh). Some things absolutely need to be classified: nuclear launch codes, specific positions & plans of the military, all sorts of military secrets (spy inf

(Sigh). Some things absolutely need to be classified: nuclear launch codes, specific positions & plans of the military, all sorts of military secrets (spy information, knowledge that gives us an advantage against any enemies), login credentials for government officials, encryption keys for things, etc. Do you really want everyone in the world to know the exact location of our nuclear weapons? Top speed of our submarines? Blind spots of our radar systems?

jMyles 12y ago
> the exact location of our nuclear weapons? Top speed of our submarines? Blind spots of our radar systems? I don't mean to sound brash or simplistic, but the simple answer is that I don't want my government to have any of those things. I'll be safer and more empowered when my government disarms, de-escalates, and makes its goings on completely transparent. As a thought exercise: how much longer do you think the world will abide nuclear weapons? Are they just here forever?
- JonFish85 12y ago
  I'm going to leave the whole first part alone, just so this doesn't devolve TOO far. >> As a thought exercise: how much longer do you think the world will abide nuclear weapons? Are they just here forever? They're probably here as long as there's a desire to utterly wipe a large area off of the map. Maybe the USA doesn't want them anymore, but many, many other countries want them and will continue to work towards getting them. Having them gets you a seat at the power table, and people have to listen to you. Even if they're not used, they're an extraordinarily valuable tool.
  - psykovsky 12y ago
    >> Having them gets you a seat at the power table What? A death sentence, you mean, only by trying to have them.
- LLWM 12y ago
  The knowledge of how to make and deploy nuclear weapons isn't going away. In the future, technology might develop to such a point where having the weapons themselves ready is unnecessary because they can be created instantly as they are needed. Does that count?
- swalsh 12y ago
  As long as there exists traditional countries, with traditional power structures, there will, and SHOULD exist a formal force. The world has a long history if bad people rising to power, and doing bad things.
sixothree 12y ago
That sounds like a false dichotomy.
- ObviousScience 12y ago
  It's a real dichotomy: The GP is replying to someone who said there should be no classified information, to which a proper refutation is to demonstrate the need for certain kinds of classified information. Two comments above that, someone was discussing whether or not this particular instance was some of the information that should be classified, followed by the claim that there should be none, and then the GPs refutation. Your comment is wrong, and adds nothing to the discussion.
  - sixothree 12y ago
    Except he was arguing that discussion the impact of revealing troop movements was the same as releasing the actual location of troop movements. The two are very dissimilar.
pstuart 12y ago
How much is truly to protect from harm and how much is to cover up mistakes and wrongdoing?
tedunangst 12y ago
Less adversarially, some people would probably prefer that their government provided medical records remain private.
mzs 12y ago
What about the pages of redacted portions under the heading of Talking Points? I guess we will need to wait a quarter century or so before we know the answer to that instead of speculating.

jMyles 12y ago

> the exact location of our nuclear weapons? Top speed of our submarines? Blind spots of our radar systems? I don't mean to sound brash or simplistic, but the simple answer is that I don't want my government to have any of those things. I'll be safer and more empowered when my government disarms, de-escalates, and makes its goings on completely transparent. As a thought exercise: how much longer do you think the world will abide nuclear weapons? Are they just here forever?

JonFish85 12y ago
I'm going to leave the whole first part alone, just so this doesn't devolve TOO far. >> As a thought exercise: how much longer do you think the world will abide nuclear weapons? Are they just here forever? They're probably here as long as there's a desire to utterly wipe a large area off of the map. Maybe the USA doesn't want them anymore, but many, many other countries want them and will continue to work towards getting them. Having them gets you a seat at the power table, and people have to listen to you. Even if they're not used, they're an extraordinarily valuable tool.
- psykovsky 12y ago
  >> Having them gets you a seat at the power table What? A death sentence, you mean, only by trying to have them.
LLWM 12y ago
The knowledge of how to make and deploy nuclear weapons isn't going away. In the future, technology might develop to such a point where having the weapons themselves ready is unnecessary because they can be created instantly as they are needed. Does that count?
swalsh 12y ago
As long as there exists traditional countries, with traditional power structures, there will, and SHOULD exist a formal force. The world has a long history if bad people rising to power, and doing bad things.

sixothree 12y ago

That sounds like a false dichotomy.

ObviousScience 12y ago
It's a real dichotomy: The GP is replying to someone who said there should be no classified information, to which a proper refutation is to demonstrate the need for certain kinds of classified information. Two comments above that, someone was discussing whether or not this particular instance was some of the information that should be classified, followed by the claim that there should be none, and then the GPs refutation. Your comment is wrong, and adds nothing to the discussion.
- sixothree 12y ago
  Except he was arguing that discussion the impact of revealing troop movements was the same as releasing the actual location of troop movements. The two are very dissimilar.

pstuart 12y ago

How much is truly to protect from harm and how much is to cover up mistakes and wrongdoing?

tedunangst 12y ago

Less adversarially, some people would probably prefer that their government provided medical records remain private.

mzs 12y ago

What about the pages of redacted portions under the heading of Talking Points? I guess we will need to wait a quarter century or so before we know the answer to that instead of speculating.