Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>"Did he omit to mention this obvious flaw in his proposal" //

Is it a "flaw". Surely it's impossible to have a system where the state retain information as secret that yet has third-party oversight and doesn't require the populous to trust a person in power (the third-party).

It seems more to be an outcome or corollary than a[n unexpected] error or "flaw".



Here's a work around for the "flaw."

Reduce the need for secret information.


No. A work around would have to entirely remove the need for secret information.


This. The "need" for secret information frequently means covering up for whatever rotten thing the government is doing somewhere. Decades later, you get to see the declassified documents, and you can see why the criminals of the time wanted it all kept a "secret".


There are legitimate needs for secret (or protected) government information.

However, over-classification tends toward the abuses you fear.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: