Information should be free. This however assumes that people will be _responsible_ for what is done with the information.
On Manuel and Jose - with a valid permit number they get the information if Bubba and Joe do not have a _valid_ permit number they do not get the information because in the absence of legitimate need for this information they probably should not have it Try going to a presidential library and trying to access the information there you still need a legitimate scholarly interest to access any of the information deemed _sensitive_ by the curator. In most of these cases the documents are available on microfilm or digitally so fragility has noting to do with the access restrictions on the document but harm to the subject of the documents does play a significant role in what information is released to the general public and what is restricted to scholarly interests. I want to live in a world where information can be free however this a utopian ideal which does not work in the _real_ world. We as a group need to create a system which allows access to this information WITHOUT resorting to having GOVERNMENT control access to the information. BUT we also need to ensure that the information is used responsibly. Having "secrets" benefits no one except the keeper of the secrets. Scott C. McGrath On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Paul Wouters wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Scott McGrath wrote: > > > Remember when you go to a library to study rare manuscripts you generally > > need to prove to the curator that you have a legitimate scholarly interest > > in the documents not simply random curiousity. > > That's because those old manuscripts are fragile, not because they think > the information should stay secret. > > If you want to live in a world where this type of information needs to > be hidden, go ahead and finish your totalitarian state. The US isn't far > off anyway. > > Paul >