3 ms·

Her LinkedIn profile, before it was scrubbed, showed her as an employee of those companies, but her job title for each was listed as "Professional". It's not en

by v64 9y ago

Her LinkedIn profile, before it was scrubbed, showed her as an employee of those companies, but her job title for each was listed as "Professional". It's not entirely clear what her previous roles were and exactly how relevant they were to the role of Chief Security Officer. It's the same divide between self taught developers and developers with a formal computer science background. If I'm hiring someone to make a website, then it may not make much of a difference, but if I need them to write kernel device drivers, more often than not your best bet is going to be with someone with a formal background who has had to demonstrate at school that they have certain knowledge prerequisites in a standardized setting. I can't speak for the cybersecurity at HP, Sun Trust, and First Data. It's possible they have great records, or it's possible they've made mistakes and gotten away with them, and these experiences led Mauldin to believe Equifax was more secure than it was. Edit: I found that she was Group VP at SunTrust from 07-09 and Senior VP and Chief Security Officer at First Data from 09-13. Her experience at First Data is relevant to the discussion and it's strange that the Washington Post article you linked to didn't mention that.

abiox 9y ago
several people i've worked with graduated from respected CS programs yet could barely program their way out of wet paper bag. the best people (engineering-wise) i've worked with are people who had a passion for the subject, were generally inquisitive sorts, and engaged in a lot of self-directed learning and research because they simply wanted to... some had degrees, and some were high-school dropouts.
- v64 9y ago
  > several people i've worked with graduated from respected CS programs yet could barely program their way out of wet paper bag How do you reconcile the fact that the individual could barely program, but they graduated from what you consider respected CS programs? Or are you saying that the programs have a public perception of respect that you personally don't believe they deserve? If the person passed that institution's examinations, then it seems to me that you're indicating either the institution has low standards compared to your industry or that they erroneously passed someone who did not meet their standards (either through incompetence or deception). I think it's relevant to note if the individuals graduated with a high GPA or if they barely scraped by. Of course autodidactism exists, but it can be very difficult to judge an individual's abilities based on one interview alone. A degree from a university at least indicates that the individual was exposed to the subject matter for a number of years, tested by individuals in the field who themselves have advanced credentials in the field, and passed the institution's examinations of knowledge. This isn't to say they're better qualified, but it gives you information that's more difficult for an individual to mislead you with. I can safely assume that a university has taken the expected precautions to ensure an individual's grades and credentials are reflective of their own work, as opposed to a self taught developer showing me a portfolio that may or may not be their original work entirely.
  - abiox 9y ago
    i would say that cs is a category of degree that some people can skate through. i would even say that undergrad degrees in general are like this, hence their ubiquity. that isn't to say that undergrad schooling doesn't have utility - it can have plenty for the sufficiently motivated.

by v64 9y ago

abiox 9y ago

several people i've worked with graduated from respected CS programs yet could barely program their way out of wet paper bag. the best people (engineering-wise) i've worked with are people who had a passion for the subject, were generally inquisitive sorts, and engaged in a lot of self-directed learning and research because they simply wanted to... some had degrees, and some were high-school dropouts.

v64 9y ago
> several people i've worked with graduated from respected CS programs yet could barely program their way out of wet paper bag How do you reconcile the fact that the individual could barely program, but they graduated from what you consider respected CS programs? Or are you saying that the programs have a public perception of respect that you personally don't believe they deserve? If the person passed that institution's examinations, then it seems to me that you're indicating either the institution has low standards compared to your industry or that they erroneously passed someone who did not meet their standards (either through incompetence or deception). I think it's relevant to note if the individuals graduated with a high GPA or if they barely scraped by. Of course autodidactism exists, but it can be very difficult to judge an individual's abilities based on one interview alone. A degree from a university at least indicates that the individual was exposed to the subject matter for a number of years, tested by individuals in the field who themselves have advanced credentials in the field, and passed the institution's examinations of knowledge. This isn't to say they're better qualified, but it gives you information that's more difficult for an individual to mislead you with. I can safely assume that a university has taken the expected precautions to ensure an individual's grades and credentials are reflective of their own work, as opposed to a self taught developer showing me a portfolio that may or may not be their original work entirely.
- abiox 9y ago
  i would say that cs is a category of degree that some people can skate through. i would even say that undergrad degrees in general are like this, hence their ubiquity. that isn't to say that undergrad schooling doesn't have utility - it can have plenty for the sufficiently motivated.