4 ms·

I like how they say he "cheated" on the entrance exam to the NSA by stealing the questions and answers from their servers, as if that doesn't just make him more

by herbig 13y ago

I like how they say he "cheated" on the entrance exam to the NSA by stealing the questions and answers from their servers, as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job..

daned 13y ago
Yes, this cracks me up. He was joining an organization of cheats and snitches and they got mad when he cheated.
sliverstorm 13y ago
as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job Maybe. Maybe not. Do we want the NSA to be rule-breaking cowboys that get the job done, or do we want them to have a rigid code of ethics? I honestly don't know. Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness; cowboyism gives us what we have now.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness Does it? How, specifically? > cowboyism gives us what we have now. Which also impairs effectiveness at doing anything that is legitimate role of any component of the US government, which necessary includes adhering to rather than subverting the Constitution of the United States.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    Does it? How, specifically? As I do not work for the NSA, I hope you will understand my lack of real-life NSA examples. But surely you have experienced the ways bureaucracy can drag down a good project.
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > But surely you have experienced the ways bureaucracy can drag down a good project. Surely I have -- and all of those have been about personal empire building, which wasn't the issue being discussed.
      - sliverstorm 13y ago
        You are familiar with the story of Kirk (Star Trek), and his exam at his academy? He cheats on the exam to beat an unwinnable simulation. This (well, Kirk in general) is portrayed as an example of the cowboy attitude at its best. I know it's fiction, but you want examples and those are some of the first that come to mind.
        dragonwriter 13y ago
        > I know it's fiction, but you want examples No, I don't want fictional examples of something posited as a loose analogy. I want an explanation of how rigid ethics would impair the effectiveness of the United States National Security Agency in fulfilling its duties under the laws and Constitution of the United States.
        sliverstorm 13y ago
        I have a little more time now, so; Predecessor to the NSA- Despite the American Black Chamber's initial success, however, it was shut down in 1929 by U.S. Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson, who defended his decision by stating that "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency#Black_Chamber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency#Black_... The NSA's core goal is the global monitoring, collection, decoding, translation and analysis of information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes. Achieving these things runs afoul of at least some people's ethical systems. For example, how does someone with an unshakeable belief in the sanctity of life work to bring in a double-agent (traitor) to his country (who will be executed) without facing some ethical dilemmas?
  - michaelt 13y ago
    All rigid systems of checks and balances impair effectiveness if your definition of "effectiveness" ignores the problems the checks and balances are designed to prevent, as checks and balances almost always involve checking and balancing. For example, think how much the president could get done if we got rid of congress, the senate, the supreme court and the constitution and we just had an all-powerful dictator. None of this mucking about with government shutdowns and filibusters and pork and vetos and negotiating. No excuses for "I just couldn't get it done due to washington politics". It would be so agile. Probably save a lot of money as well.
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      You do make a good example. Benevolent dictators do appear to be extremely effective. Of course they are hard to come by, but that isn't the question here.

by herbig 13y ago

I like how they say he "cheated" on the entrance exam to the NSA by stealing the questions and answers from their servers, as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job..

daned 13y ago

Yes, this cracks me up. He was joining an organization of cheats and snitches and they got mad when he cheated.

sliverstorm 13y ago

as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job Maybe. Maybe not. Do we want the NSA to be rule-breaking cowboys that get the job done, or do we want them to have a rigid code of ethics? I honestly don't know. Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness; cowboyism gives us what we have now.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness Does it? How, specifically? > cowboyism gives us what we have now. Which also impairs effectiveness at doing anything that is legitimate role of any component of the US government, which necessary includes adhering to rather than subverting the Constitution of the United States.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Does it? How, specifically? As I do not work for the NSA, I hope you will understand my lack of real-life NSA examples. But surely you have experienced the ways bureaucracy can drag down a good project.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > But surely you have experienced the ways bureaucracy can drag down a good project. Surely I have -- and all of those have been about personal empire building, which wasn't the issue being discussed.
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      You are familiar with the story of Kirk (Star Trek), and his exam at his academy? He cheats on the exam to beat an unwinnable simulation. This (well, Kirk in general) is portrayed as an example of the cowboy attitude at its best. I know it's fiction, but you want examples and those are some of the first that come to mind.
      - dragonwriter 13y ago
        > I know it's fiction, but you want examples No, I don't want fictional examples of something posited as a loose analogy. I want an explanation of how rigid ethics would impair the effectiveness of the United States National Security Agency in fulfilling its duties under the laws and Constitution of the United States.
        sliverstorm 13y ago
        I have a little more time now, so; Predecessor to the NSA- Despite the American Black Chamber's initial success, however, it was shut down in 1929 by U.S. Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson, who defended his decision by stating that "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency#Black_Chamber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency#Black_... The NSA's core goal is the global monitoring, collection, decoding, translation and analysis of information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes. Achieving these things runs afoul of at least some people's ethical systems. For example, how does someone with an unshakeable belief in the sanctity of life work to bring in a double-agent (traitor) to his country (who will be executed) without facing some ethical dilemmas?
- michaelt 13y ago
  All rigid systems of checks and balances impair effectiveness if your definition of "effectiveness" ignores the problems the checks and balances are designed to prevent, as checks and balances almost always involve checking and balancing. For example, think how much the president could get done if we got rid of congress, the senate, the supreme court and the constitution and we just had an all-powerful dictator. None of this mucking about with government shutdowns and filibusters and pork and vetos and negotiating. No excuses for "I just couldn't get it done due to washington politics". It would be so agile. Probably save a lot of money as well.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    You do make a good example. Benevolent dictators do appear to be extremely effective. Of course they are hard to come by, but that isn't the question here.