4 ms·

> You're constructing a straw man without being curious about the things you yourself are missing. Could you point out the straw man in question? I feel like

by Gormo 2y ago

> You're constructing a straw man without being curious about the things you yourself are missing. Could you point out the straw man in question? I feel like everything I posted above is a direct response to arguments I gleaned from your previous comment, and certainly didn't intentionally attribute any argument to you that I didn't think you were actually making. > I suggest you read parent comment about balance and tradeoffs inherent in forward deployment again. I've reread it a couple of times, and I'm afraid I'm not seeing any hidden propositions in it that I missed the first time around. Could you be more explicit about what you're getting at? My comment about finding ways to enable internet access in a more controlled way was specifically targeting your argument about the security vs. morale tradeoff, and my point about the absurdity of trying to make that tradeoff for society as a whole in a scenario where you imply the military can't make it for its own operations still seems to apply here.

ethbr1 2y ago
> Could you point out the straw man in question? >> I'd be astonished if I learned that soldiers on duty were totally free to do as they please the expense of operational security The post you were replying to didn't suggest anything about total freedom. You're exaggerating their words to make your argument easier. >> I'd be equally astonished if I found that military recruitment was based on enlisting cross-sectional samples of demographic categories Given initial enlistment age ranges between 17 and 30/40 [0], you get cohorts from specific generations. Kids who are 17 now were born ~2008, which is just starting to be kids with smartphones and mobile devices their entire lives. No cross-sectioning required: just upper and lower age limits. >> And I'm sure that the military can find ways of enabling deployed personnel to use the internet without sacrificing security or oversight I'm going to assume you're honestly ignorant of military networks and field device management at scale. The military runs segregated networks. Secure networks require approved devices; those devices are extremely locked down. There are often also public internet networks for MWR reasons. Unmanaged devices can be used on those networks. Furthermore, in most non-naval deployments, terrestrial cellular data networks are also accessible. >> for example by requiring them to use secured military-issue computers and smartphones, or by having an inspection or vetting process for hardware and software when soldiers want to use their own devices. Military IT is already overloaded managing the vast number of secure devices and networks, so having them manage consumer devices in any way is a non-starter. For scale context, the DoD PKI includes ~4 million active CAC cards. [1] Unmanaged consumer devices + CAC are also often used for less-privileged interaction with the military (e.g. HR functions). > My comment about finding ways to enable internet access in a more controlled way was specifically targeting your argument about the security vs. morale tradeoff And the responses that you're getting are that these are non-trivial problems for real-world reasons. Furthermore, you seem to have a lack of understanding about how much it sucks to be stuck in a forward base, and how important maintaining morale is to command authority and force effectiveness. PS: Also, look at user names. I'm not the author of the original comment you replied to. [0] https://www.usa.gov/military-requirements https://www.usa.gov/military-requirements [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card

by Gormo 2y ago

ethbr1 2y ago

> Could you point out the straw man in question? >> I'd be astonished if I learned that soldiers on duty were totally free to do as they please the expense of operational security The post you were replying to didn't suggest anything about total freedom. You're exaggerating their words to make your argument easier. >> I'd be equally astonished if I found that military recruitment was based on enlisting cross-sectional samples of demographic categories Given initial enlistment age ranges between 17 and 30/40 [0], you get cohorts from specific generations. Kids who are 17 now were born ~2008, which is just starting to be kids with smartphones and mobile devices their entire lives. No cross-sectioning required: just upper and lower age limits. >> And I'm sure that the military can find ways of enabling deployed personnel to use the internet without sacrificing security or oversight I'm going to assume you're honestly ignorant of military networks and field device management at scale. The military runs segregated networks. Secure networks require approved devices; those devices are extremely locked down. There are often also public internet networks for MWR reasons. Unmanaged devices can be used on those networks. Furthermore, in most non-naval deployments, terrestrial cellular data networks are also accessible. >> for example by requiring them to use secured military-issue computers and smartphones, or by having an inspection or vetting process for hardware and software when soldiers want to use their own devices. Military IT is already overloaded managing the vast number of secure devices and networks, so having them manage consumer devices in any way is a non-starter. For scale context, the DoD PKI includes ~4 million active CAC cards. [1] Unmanaged consumer devices + CAC are also often used for less-privileged interaction with the military (e.g. HR functions). > My comment about finding ways to enable internet access in a more controlled way was specifically targeting your argument about the security vs. morale tradeoff And the responses that you're getting are that these are non-trivial problems for real-world reasons. Furthermore, you seem to have a lack of understanding about how much it sucks to be stuck in a forward base, and how important maintaining morale is to command authority and force effectiveness. PS: Also, look at user names. I'm not the author of the original comment you replied to. [0] https://www.usa.gov/military-requirements https://www.usa.gov/military-requirements [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card