This post doesn't match the sentiment in the source article
While the headline and the wording here makes it looks like the source article is criticizing Obama for not been more open, the article itself is most certainly not critical, in fact, even praised Obama administration on some point.
Also, let's put the numbers in some context here, shall we? In the article, it stated:
"The administration refused to release any sought-after materials in more than 1-in-3 information requests, including cases when it couldn’t find records, a person refused to pay for copies or the request was determined to be improper under the law,"
So the article is lumping everything together, where we are really only concerned about those that administration refused to respond to for no legitamate reason.
The post here also made no mention about improvements in some critical area, such as when the article mentioned:
"Perrilli said the Justice Department released full FOIA records 42 percent of the time last year, up from 36 percent in 2008"
Also there are no mention here for comments questioning the FOIA processing number as a metric to use, or the praises in the article, such as
"Steven Aftergood, the director of the Federation of American Scientists’ government secrecy project, wondered whether “FOIA processing” is the right metric of focus.
“The ability to engage on matters of controversy, that’s really what we’re interested in when we ask for transparency. We’re not asking for piles of paper,” said Aftergood, who files dozens of FOIA requests annually.
Still, he has noticed “improvements in FOIA processing” under the Obama administration. And he said the administration is responsible for some “epochal” disclosures.
“For the first time last year we were given an unclassified description of the size of the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal,” he said. “That is something we have not seen for over a half of a century. We have been banging on the door for 20 years or longer for that.”
And last month, the government disclosed, for the first time, its intelligence budget request — $55 billion for next year.
“I sued the CIA in 1999 asking for total intelligence budget request. They fought back and I lost the lawsuit. The court agreed that this would damage national security,” Aftergood said. “Within the world of secrecy, these are epochal changes. They are entirely to the administration’s credit.”"
So, I'm afraid Techdirt, in this case at least, has not behaved in an objective and credible manner.
If fighting piracy requires us to disregard freedom of expression, then it's not worth fighting for.
If fighting piracy can only be done with someones freedom of expression violated as collateral damage, then it's not worth fighting for.
If those parties that are interested in fighting piracy keep disregarding the violation of freedom of expression during their fight and spouting garbage trying to white wash it, then it's actually these parties that we have to fight.
Somehow I doubt it. Would any President and Congress have enough spine to admit in the haste to deal with terrorist, the government has created a monster infinitely more damaging to the foundation of this country? If they can't do that, they can't stop Homeland security from over reaching. Chalking up each violation of constitution as isolated incident won't be much of a deterrent.
By your standard, every publisher of chemistry or biology book listing the poisonious property of some particular compound can be charged with "induces" commision of crime if said chemical compound is used to poison someone.
No. But I do find it ironic that politicians on one hand say Chinese firms are not to be trusted because there's this adversarial relationship between China and US, then turn around complain that China has put restrictions on US firms operating in China.
Re: On the one hand, I say let's not *assume* corruption...
The entire US political structure was based on the principle that public officials should not be assumed to be honest. All the check and balance designed into the system were there because the designer assumed officials could not be trusted to be honest, thus needing all the restraint in the system to stop them, and make exposing them easier if they do.
All of these wink wink deals our politicians and private sections have going on right now is the result of us assuming there aren't any real corruption going on. The system can only work when the common people use the system as it's designed. When there's apparence of corruption, for the most part, there ARE corruptions.
I think it's highly important for our public officials, lobbyists, and private sector heads to sign agreement barring working for the other side for a few years after ending the corrent employment.
These people support this legislation because that would be the easiest way to defend against a Chinese, or any other competitor for that matter. Every time someone came in and threatened your business, just file a complaint that they somehow were counterfeiting, infringing, or some other violations tacked on to this bill, then get someone in the government to issue a directive to seize their domain. Viola, competition squashed.
or that Apple HAD been making up numbers. Every company will at one time or another be faced with the decision to whether fudge the number to cover up a disappointing quarter, or come clean about it and gets hit in the stock market.
When we see these signs, we'll just have to dig deeper, be more suspicious, cool our head, so we don't get taken by the lies, if there is any.
Isn't the code supposed to be inside the "football", i.e., the black suitcase cuffed to the staffer's hand? And one aid carries the suitcase around the president 24 hour straight in case it is needed? Since we can safely assume that one staffer can't be on duty 24/7, the staffer on the next shift would have discovered the code was missing when he arrives on duty and inspect the content of "football" just to make sure he doesn't gets blamed for this type of issues. Even if the suitcase can't be opened until ordered by the president, there would have been a seal in place to make sure it wasn't tampered with, still would have required inspection by the next shift.
And don't tell me that there isn't such inspection taking places on every instance the "football" changes hand. Check-in/check-out procedures are in place even in all kinds of non-secure places, to think such procedure isn't routine with one of the most important item in the world is just moronic.
Don't worry about other countries using that loophole
If they do as much as think about it, US will begin to clobber them from all front, business, political, and possibility even military. You see, such loopholes are allowed to be used by US only, and maybe a few select allies of US. For everyone else, it's just something to make them think there's no danger in signing the treaty.
Think about all those treaties US government signed with Native Americans, and how many loopholes the Indians were able to use. The ACTA is just a modern version of those.
He's referring to what will happen to the handset manufacturers, not how the consumers would like such a thing. Just look at the PC market, all hardware makers who use Windows OS are operating on razor thin margins from their PC making operations. If Android in mobile market become what Windows is to PC market, PC makers of today is what's going to happen to phone makers of tomorrow.
Nokia would only be accelerating it's own demise if they jump into the Android crowd. Because in that world, high end is still taken by Apple, and low end taken by the Chinese.
On the post: For All The Promises Of Transparency, Obama Administration Responding To Fewer FOIA Requests
Re: Please
On the post: For All The Promises Of Transparency, Obama Administration Responding To Fewer FOIA Requests
This post doesn't match the sentiment in the source article
Also, let's put the numbers in some context here, shall we? In the article, it stated:
"The administration refused to release any sought-after materials in more than 1-in-3 information requests, including cases when it couldn’t find records, a person refused to pay for copies or the request was determined to be improper under the law,"
So the article is lumping everything together, where we are really only concerned about those that administration refused to respond to for no legitamate reason.
The post here also made no mention about improvements in some critical area, such as when the article mentioned:
"Perrilli said the Justice Department released full FOIA records 42 percent of the time last year, up from 36 percent in 2008"
Also there are no mention here for comments questioning the FOIA processing number as a metric to use, or the praises in the article, such as
"Steven Aftergood, the director of the Federation of American Scientists’ government secrecy project, wondered whether “FOIA processing” is the right metric of focus.
“The ability to engage on matters of controversy, that’s really what we’re interested in when we ask for transparency. We’re not asking for piles of paper,” said Aftergood, who files dozens of FOIA requests annually.
Still, he has noticed “improvements in FOIA processing” under the Obama administration. And he said the administration is responsible for some “epochal” disclosures.
“For the first time last year we were given an unclassified description of the size of the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal,” he said. “That is something we have not seen for over a half of a century. We have been banging on the door for 20 years or longer for that.”
And last month, the government disclosed, for the first time, its intelligence budget request — $55 billion for next year.
“I sued the CIA in 1999 asking for total intelligence budget request. They fought back and I lost the lawsuit. The court agreed that this would damage national security,” Aftergood said. “Within the world of secrecy, these are epochal changes. They are entirely to the administration’s credit.”"
So, I'm afraid Techdirt, in this case at least, has not behaved in an objective and credible manner.
On the post: Apple Tries To Convince Trademark Board That App Store Really Means Apple Store
Re: Re: Changing reality to suit your favorite corporation.
On the post: RIAA Not Happy With Rep. Lofgren Calling Out ICE For Web Censorship
Re: Re: Ugh, there's the "F" word again
If fighting piracy can only be done with someones freedom of expression violated as collateral damage, then it's not worth fighting for.
If those parties that are interested in fighting piracy keep disregarding the violation of freedom of expression during their fight and spouting garbage trying to white wash it, then it's actually these parties that we have to fight.
On the post: Feds Really Do Seem To Think That Linking To Infringing Content Can Be A Jailable Offense
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just trying to help.
On the post: Feds Really Do Seem To Think That Linking To Infringing Content Can Be A Jailable Offense
Re: Re: I really do not mind them doing this ....
On the post: Feds Really Do Seem To Think That Linking To Infringing Content Can Be A Jailable Offense
Re: Re: Re: Just trying to help.
On the post: Huawei To US Government: Please Investigate Us
Re:
On the post: Guy Uses GPS Data On Mobile Phone To Get Out Of A Speeding Ticket
Re:
And as inaccurate as GPS may be, it's still probably better than a radar gun.
On the post: Revolving Door Between Gov't And Industry Continues: Pharma Lawyer Goes To USPTO As Gov't Financial Regulator Goes To Wall St.
Re: On the one hand, I say let's not *assume* corruption...
All of these wink wink deals our politicians and private sections have going on right now is the result of us assuming there aren't any real corruption going on. The system can only work when the common people use the system as it's designed. When there's apparence of corruption, for the most part, there ARE corruptions.
I think it's highly important for our public officials, lobbyists, and private sector heads to sign agreement barring working for the other side for a few years after ending the corrent employment.
On the post: Forget Hot Coffee, Now Disney Is Sued For Severe Burns From Nacho Cheese
Re: Food Safety...
On the post: Unexpected New Years SMS From Mobile Operator May Have Killed Would Be Suicide Bomber
Re: There will be an app for that
On the post: Cures For Paralysis, Diabetes And Blindness Hindered By Patents
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Every living human will die at some point in their life, so everyone is dead.
Everything you eat turns into Sh*t that come out of your ass*ole, so you ate sh*t all your life.
On the post: Jim D'Addario Defends His Support Of COICA & Domain Seizures
Re: COICA will affect China how?
On the post: If You Ask The Question In A Certain Way, 61% Of Americans Say They Support An Internet Kill Switch
Re:
On the post: Telltale Signs A CEO Is Lying (Or Not)
Who's to say Steve isn't lying
When we see these signs, we'll just have to dig deeper, be more suspicious, cool our head, so we don't get taken by the lies, if there is any.
On the post: US Lost The Codes For Nuclear Launch For Months
I say this is just a hoax
And don't tell me that there isn't such inspection taking places on every instance the "football" changes hand. Check-in/check-out procedures are in place even in all kinds of non-secure places, to think such procedure isn't routine with one of the most important item in the world is just moronic.
On the post: US Basically Says It'll Ignore Anything In ACTA That It Doesn't Like... So How About Everyone Else?
Don't worry about other countries using that loophole
Think about all those treaties US government signed with Native Americans, and how many loopholes the Indians were able to use. The ACTA is just a modern version of those.
On the post: Nokia VP Compares Android To Peeing In Your Pants To Stay Warm
Re: Good Thing He Is Going
Nokia would only be accelerating it's own demise if they jump into the Android crowd. Because in that world, high end is still taken by Apple, and low end taken by the Chinese.
On the post: Back When The Senate Tried To Ban Dial Telephones
Re: Somewhat buried lede
Next >>