3 ms·

Cellphones are functionally equivalent to laptops and desktops-- they're computers. Now, independent of that, if the regulations and law do not treat them equa

by huffmsa 10y ago

Cellphones are functionally equivalent to laptops and desktops-- they're computers. Now, independent of that, if the regulations and law do not treat them equally, they are not legally equal.

dogma1138 10y ago
I think the issue here is she used her unsecure cellphone and presumably "private" email server to approve these strikes in which case it might have caused operational information to leak. This isn't about someone using a cellphone or a laptop, this is about someone using any communication device that wasn't clear for the transmission of classified information to approve strikes which i would only presume to be classified if only due to operational reasons.
- hacker42 10y ago
  It leaves the impression of a quick and weakly informed decision (especially so in the context of executing people). I personally would never respond to an important inquiry on mobile because the relatively limited screen and input interface (e.g. auto-correct) would make me anxious that I am missing some crucial piece of information.
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    Not really a lot of times this can be a "last moment" highly time sensitive decision based on who exactly is identified at the strike target. Allot of people are involved in the decision making, various heads of agencies, the joint chiefs, cabinet members, the president, the vice president, members of congress, the speaker of the house etc. all can be involved depending on the strike. You also have variables that can change for example a large than expected number of non-combatants or an unexpected high value target and when those parameters change the mission planners and operators usually have to refer up to notify people like the Secretary of State and have them make a decision to proceed, abort, change mission parameters (e.g. from survey to kill, or from kill to capture) etc. Like it or not from all aspects these aren't decisions that can be open to lengthy debate this isn't how combat works, and having to make a time sensitive decision is something that people at those levels of government and the military have to do all the time. So sorry I don't see how the fact that a cellphone has been used is some how makes it look worse than what it already is, it's just a tool like anything else.

by huffmsa 10y ago

Cellphones are functionally equivalent to laptops and desktops-- they're computers. Now, independent of that, if the regulations and law do not treat them equally, they are not legally equal.

dogma1138 10y ago

I think the issue here is she used her unsecure cellphone and presumably "private" email server to approve these strikes in which case it might have caused operational information to leak. This isn't about someone using a cellphone or a laptop, this is about someone using any communication device that wasn't clear for the transmission of classified information to approve strikes which i would only presume to be classified if only due to operational reasons.

hacker42 10y ago
It leaves the impression of a quick and weakly informed decision (especially so in the context of executing people). I personally would never respond to an important inquiry on mobile because the relatively limited screen and input interface (e.g. auto-correct) would make me anxious that I am missing some crucial piece of information.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  Not really a lot of times this can be a "last moment" highly time sensitive decision based on who exactly is identified at the strike target. Allot of people are involved in the decision making, various heads of agencies, the joint chiefs, cabinet members, the president, the vice president, members of congress, the speaker of the house etc. all can be involved depending on the strike. You also have variables that can change for example a large than expected number of non-combatants or an unexpected high value target and when those parameters change the mission planners and operators usually have to refer up to notify people like the Secretary of State and have them make a decision to proceed, abort, change mission parameters (e.g. from survey to kill, or from kill to capture) etc. Like it or not from all aspects these aren't decisions that can be open to lengthy debate this isn't how combat works, and having to make a time sensitive decision is something that people at those levels of government and the military have to do all the time. So sorry I don't see how the fact that a cellphone has been used is some how makes it look worse than what it already is, it's just a tool like anything else.