“Your failure to plan does not constitute my emergency”.
Sounds to me like they’re just choosing not to comply with FOIA, a federal law.
This is a bullshit ruling and everyone involved with it knows it. They have my information, I require a copy of my information, end of story. Not providing it is noncompliance.
But of course nothing will happen because the American federal government is broken.
What if I didn’t turn on my office lights, so now I can’t read any written materials. I decline the use of technology like lights to help me with this. Now we don’t have to fill requests for written materials.
I threw away all speakers and headphones. Any audio cannot be processed because we lack the technology and we do not have to get more.
I don’t care weather they read it by microwave the tape and provide me a transcript of chef and dinner quest first reactions to it. Or if that ends up actually useful. But its interesting to know wether or not specific data is at all requestable.
When it comes to things that are deemed public, all the information around it should be too, regardless of intend or use.
In essence, everything is information, it would be a mistake to discriminate on perceived value because we never know what future science can accomplish or what specific aspiration someone may follow.
Practical Example:
While its reasonable that most people assume
The text of the Declaration of Independence is what is important. That is not the case if you happen to do a historical study of hemp genetics and want to learn what strain of the plant was used for the declaration.
An officia office should to my opinion put as much effort into being helpful against requests of both kind.
The way I understand this, the issue is that without reading it they cannot verify that it doesn’t contain sensitive information, so they can’t give it out. That sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
Ah no, they can’t give it out because they aren’t able to ensure that there’s no sensible data on it.
Btw, how about donating them a tape-to-usb converter? Can they refuse it? With some “we can’t ensure integrity and security of the device” mumbo jumbo?
you could donate one and at the same time claim (somewhere really anonymously in the internet) that you want to destroy that tape with that player for protection. They then might actually ‘want’ to investigate
the tape
the player
(3. possibly also you)
after doing 1 and 2 they then actually have the technology AND the hardware to play that stupid tape.
if they do 3. and ask you who you want to protect, you can truthfully say “law fulfillment”
always think outside the box AND around the corner ;-)
In that case cant we request the raw data in another format? I dont care about the end result if i can make em run trough hoops to comply
How, without the right kind of reader
“Your failure to plan does not constitute my emergency”.
Sounds to me like they’re just choosing not to comply with FOIA, a federal law.
This is a bullshit ruling and everyone involved with it knows it. They have my information, I require a copy of my information, end of story. Not providing it is noncompliance.
But of course nothing will happen because the American federal government is broken.
What if I didn’t turn on my office lights, so now I can’t read any written materials. I decline the use of technology like lights to help me with this. Now we don’t have to fill requests for written materials.
I threw away all speakers and headphones. Any audio cannot be processed because we lack the technology and we do not have to get more.
See how stupid this is???
I never specified correctly read data.
I don’t care weather they read it by microwave the tape and provide me a transcript of chef and dinner quest first reactions to it. Or if that ends up actually useful. But its interesting to know wether or not specific data is at all requestable.
When it comes to things that are deemed public, all the information around it should be too, regardless of intend or use.
In essence, everything is information, it would be a mistake to discriminate on perceived value because we never know what future science can accomplish or what specific aspiration someone may follow.
Practical Example: While its reasonable that most people assume The text of the Declaration of Independence is what is important. That is not the case if you happen to do a historical study of hemp genetics and want to learn what strain of the plant was used for the declaration.
An officia office should to my opinion put as much effort into being helpful against requests of both kind.
The way I understand this, the issue is that without reading it they cannot verify that it doesn’t contain sensitive information, so they can’t give it out. That sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
The president can’t lie to us if he doesn’t know who he is
Ah no, they can’t give it out because they aren’t able to ensure that there’s no sensible data on it.
Btw, how about donating them a tape-to-usb converter? Can they refuse it? With some “we can’t ensure integrity and security of the device” mumbo jumbo?
They haven’t forgotten about “The Thing”. Anyone donating hardware might have an ulterior motive for wanting hardware inside an NSA building.
If the information that is the tape cant come to us maybe we can visit the tape and measure it ourselves.
you could donate one and at the same time claim (somewhere really anonymously in the internet) that you want to destroy that tape with that player for protection. They then might actually ‘want’ to investigate
(3. possibly also you)
after doing 1 and 2 they then actually have the technology AND the hardware to play that stupid tape.
if they do 3. and ask you who you want to protect, you can truthfully say “law fulfillment”
always think outside the box AND around the corner ;-)
hope that helps