3 ms·
>Many of the country’s top security officials attended the briefing, including Alexander, Dempsey, Robert Mueller, the head of the F.B.I., and Janet Napolitano,
by phaus 12y ago
>Many of the country’s top security officials attended the briefing, including Alexander, Dempsey, Robert Mueller, the head of the F.B.I., and Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Gen. Martin Dempsey - Old School Armored Cavalry Officer. Knows lots about killing people, not a single thing about network security.
Robert Mueller - Old School Cop. Knows lots about bank robberies. Doesn't know anything about network security nor does he care to learn about it.
Janet Napolitano - Given direct authority over a large part of the federal government's cyber-defense capabilities, knows fuck-all about network security. Doesn't like using computers.
Surely more than one (Alexander) actual security expert attended the meeting?
- danso 12y ago> "Many of the"..."including"... That phrase does not preclude the attendance of other officials, some of who may be actual security experts, nor does it preclude the attendance of their staff, some of who (one would hope) most definitely are the security experts.
- phaus 12y agoRight, but the context of the article was using them as examples of security experts. When you give examples to support a statement, you should give the best examples you can come up with.
- snowwrestler 12y agoThe purpose of a briefing is to inform and educate. So of course the people attending are going to be those in need of informing and educating.
- phaus 12y agoMost government briefings are given without the intent of educating someone on a subject with which they are completely unfamiliar. Most of them are more like status updates for ongoing projects and operations. Its supposed to help leadership make better decisions.