DAE get weirded out when their 'forbidden' research hits a round number?

I was digging into old medical trial data from the 1950s that most libraries won't touch, and my document counter hit exactly 1,000 suppressed files. One side says this is just data hoarding, but the other argues these are hidden histories we need to see. Where do you draw the line between preserving risky ideas and just collecting dangerous info?

3 comments

3 Comments

the_holly1mo ago

Honestly, that round number is probably just a coincidence. A thousand files sounds like a lot, but it's likely just messy old record keeping, not some big secret. Most of that stuff is hidden because it's wrong or dangerous, not because it's history we need. What good comes from spreading old, bad ideas that could hurt people?

gibson.elizabeth1mo ago

Wrong or dangerous" is a pretty low bar for hiding history. We can learn from bad ideas without spreading them.

elizabethg1813d ago

I feel you on the "wrong or dangerous" bar being low for hiding history. In my own deep dive into old engineering reports from the 60s, I found a ton of stuff that was just plain incorrect, not some grand conspiracy. Setting a personal rule to only share what's been verified by a second source helped me sort the real history from the garbage data.