3 ms·
let's say this Cyber Security Minister has trusted subordinates who do actually understand the technical aspects. how do they even begin to communicate with a p
by leeoniya 8y ago
let's say this Cyber Security Minister has trusted subordinates who do actually understand the technical aspects. how do they even begin to communicate with a person who's never used a computer? purely in metaphors?
there needs to be at minimum some common language between managers and what they're managing. otherwise it worse than broken telephone.
without a certain level of understanding, it's just a useless abstraction level for the sake of filling a govt position.
- SiempreViernes 8y agoIn a more sane situation the minister would read up to gain some basic literacy in the field, the fact that he hasn't is strong evidence that he is an idiot. But you can be an idiot regardless of experience, and selecting an idiot as minister is arguably the graver error.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoWhy would they need to understand any technical aspects? Ultimately it comes down to making a decision between several alternatives, those alternatives have tradeoffs. If the technical people can't explain what those tradeoffs are in terms the non-technical decision maker can understand, then either they don't understand them themselves, or they aren't worth being concerned about.
- krapp 8y ago>How do they even begin to communicate with a person who's never used a computer? purely in metaphors? They don't. It's a bureaucracy, not a meritocracy. The first business of a bureaucracy is to maintain the bureaucracy, and the second business of a bureaucracy is to reward party loyalty, and the third is for the bureaucrat to maintain and enhance personal power. He will listen to people of his own social class and party whose word and sponsorship lends political merit, take orders from above, and his subordinates will do as they're told.