4 ms·

Uh, it's marked FOUO, not Top Secret, and it's going to be made public when it gets issued anyway, troll.

by dguido 14y ago

001sky 14y ago
Um, "leaked" like pg "not marked top secret" email? Lots of reasons to "leak" all kinds of data. Leaked simply means distributed prior to official release. This is likely a "trial baloon" or sum such. then, they change it after the criticism to avoid further embarrassmnet, nor not. either way.
- tptacek 14y ago
  What does that even mean? Graham sent an email blast to hundreds of people with negotiation advice in it. The problem isn't that the mail got out --- of course the mail got out. He sent it to a giant mailing list. The problem is that publications like Venturebeat and Techdirt went to town on the email spinning it into something it wasn't. And the problem is people who promote that cynically packaged excreta on sites like HN.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    Uh, it's marked FOUO, not Top Secret, and it's going to be made public when it gets issued anyway, troll. ..... FOUO=for official use only, ie = confidential pg internal email = confidential [1] almost all leaks = confidential a PR before embargo = confidential ...... What does that even mean? This is the world we live in...Leaks are a form of "black hat" PR [2] ...... Calling someone a [troll] for suggesting this may be a [trial baloon] seems un-intelligent at best. Whether or not its good policy or bad or good pr strategy or bad is a fair topic of discussion. ....... [1] This was a simplification of "internal", if it technically includes portfolio companies that are legally distinct entities from YC. But being pedandtic here is off point. This was being illustrative that "all kinds of data could be leaked", and in particular all manner of private, non-governmental information, that for whatever reason, people feel should not be sent to the press and have a reasonable expectation of privacy around. [2] I.e. The leak can be by a friend or foe, for information or dis-information, etc.
    - tptacek 14y ago
      It's easy to keep an argument going if you just ignore what the other party says and repeat your talking points over and over again. But my last comment was pretty simple: Graham's "internal" mail, which went to hundreds of people on a mailing list, wasn't "confidential". For that matter, "FUOU" is explicitly not classified. If you can't make a reasonable analysis of something as simple as Paul Graham's mail to YC companies, what makes you think you're a credible critic of public policy, which is much more complicated?
      - 001sky 14y ago
        Graham's "internal" mail...wasn't "confidential" And Pg and other VC's don't sign NDAs but confidentiality is understood in certain areas...almost all communication relating to corporate finace and investment, BOD internal deliberations, communications for example... For that matter, "FUOU" is explicitly not classified. Again, this is off-point...its not "official" use to send internal <government> documents to the press for "public" consumption. This is really "rookie" 101 type stuff, things that in a BigCo job are subject to all kinds of intenal compliance procedures...ect...not even debatable In addition, there are disclosure rules around market moving informations, and all kinds of stuff... Routinely dis-respected, but thats another story.[1] __________ [1] These rules typically apply to Public companies, and revolve around providing fair access to information for retail investors and the like. Reg FD is an example.
        tptacek 14y ago
        Also easy to keep an argument going by saying "my point is understood to be correct" instead of backing it up. You seem to be having a hard time with the point that Graham sent his negotiating advice to a giant freaking mailing list with many tens of companies on it. If he wanted it confidential, he wouldn't have done that. Graham is many annoying things but an idiot is not one of them.
        001sky 14y ago
        How many companies of those is he an investor in? and/or advisor? It was advice on sensitive negotiations for "YC Backed" companies? or are we talking a different e-mail?
  - 001sky 14y ago
    White House confirms cybersecurity order in the works (thehill.com) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 Means nothing more than its a "leak", leaks are for spin as you point out, but thats not the issue. That's just obvious.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    Means nothing more than its a "leak", leaks are for spin as you point out, but thats not the issue. That's just obvious. Confirmation: White House confirms cybersecurity order in the works (thehill.com) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477

Uh, it's marked FOUO, not Top Secret, and it's going to be made public when it gets issued anyway, troll.

by dguido 14y ago

Uh, it's marked FOUO, not Top Secret, and it's going to be made public when it gets issued anyway, troll.

Um, "leaked" like pg "not marked top secret" email? Lots of reasons to "leak" all kinds of data. Leaked simply means distributed prior to official release. This is likely a "trial baloon" or sum such. then, they change it after the criticism to avoid further embarrassmnet, nor not. either way.

tptacek 14y ago
What does that even mean? Graham sent an email blast to hundreds of people with negotiation advice in it. The problem isn't that the mail got out --- of course the mail got out. He sent it to a giant mailing list. The problem is that publications like Venturebeat and Techdirt went to town on the email spinning it into something it wasn't. And the problem is people who promote that cynically packaged excreta on sites like HN.
- 001sky 14y ago
  Uh, it's marked FOUO, not Top Secret, and it's going to be made public when it gets issued anyway, troll. ..... FOUO=for official use only, ie = confidential pg internal email = confidential [1] almost all leaks = confidential a PR before embargo = confidential ...... What does that even mean? This is the world we live in...Leaks are a form of "black hat" PR [2] ...... Calling someone a [troll] for suggesting this may be a [trial baloon] seems un-intelligent at best. Whether or not its good policy or bad or good pr strategy or bad is a fair topic of discussion. ....... [1] This was a simplification of "internal", if it technically includes portfolio companies that are legally distinct entities from YC. But being pedandtic here is off point. This was being illustrative that "all kinds of data could be leaked", and in particular all manner of private, non-governmental information, that for whatever reason, people feel should not be sent to the press and have a reasonable expectation of privacy around. [2] I.e. The leak can be by a friend or foe, for information or dis-information, etc.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    It's easy to keep an argument going if you just ignore what the other party says and repeat your talking points over and over again. But my last comment was pretty simple: Graham's "internal" mail, which went to hundreds of people on a mailing list, wasn't "confidential". For that matter, "FUOU" is explicitly not classified. If you can't make a reasonable analysis of something as simple as Paul Graham's mail to YC companies, what makes you think you're a credible critic of public policy, which is much more complicated?
    - 001sky 14y ago
      Graham's "internal" mail...wasn't "confidential" And Pg and other VC's don't sign NDAs but confidentiality is understood in certain areas...almost all communication relating to corporate finace and investment, BOD internal deliberations, communications for example... For that matter, "FUOU" is explicitly not classified. Again, this is off-point...its not "official" use to send internal <government> documents to the press for "public" consumption. This is really "rookie" 101 type stuff, things that in a BigCo job are subject to all kinds of intenal compliance procedures...ect...not even debatable In addition, there are disclosure rules around market moving informations, and all kinds of stuff... Routinely dis-respected, but thats another story.[1] __________ [1] These rules typically apply to Public companies, and revolve around providing fair access to information for retail investors and the like. Reg FD is an example.
      - tptacek 14y ago
        Also easy to keep an argument going by saying "my point is understood to be correct" instead of backing it up. You seem to be having a hard time with the point that Graham sent his negotiating advice to a giant freaking mailing list with many tens of companies on it. If he wanted it confidential, he wouldn't have done that. Graham is many annoying things but an idiot is not one of them.
        001sky 14y ago
        How many companies of those is he an investor in? and/or advisor? It was advice on sensitive negotiations for "YC Backed" companies? or are we talking a different e-mail?
- 001sky 14y ago
  White House confirms cybersecurity order in the works (thehill.com) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 Means nothing more than its a "leak", leaks are for spin as you point out, but thats not the issue. That's just obvious.
- 001sky 14y ago
  Means nothing more than its a "leak", leaks are for spin as you point out, but thats not the issue. That's just obvious. Confirmation: White House confirms cybersecurity order in the works (thehill.com) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534477