Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 76 posts

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#51

Post by wolfgke »

vacri wrote: post #43
kmonsen wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't really have to do drug tests though. Should they for example install monitoring in employees cars to make sure they never speed?

I don't mean to defend the FBI's activites, I just mean to note that if your reason for being is "opposing X", then it's reasonable that you check your employees for X. The FBI opposes drugs big time. It doesn't care about people speeding in cars.

> The FBI opposes drugs big time. It doesn't care about people speeding in cars.

First: If the FBI opposes drugs: then they should at least as strongly oppose nicotine and (in particular) alcohol, too. Oh, you mean drugs that are by some historic accident illegal.

Second: Do the cybersecurity jobs one does at the FBI have any property that will prevent former pot smokers doing them? If not, it's simply a discrimination.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#52

Post by vacri »

Karnickel wrote: post #38
vacri wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does it say there are no long term career prospects? Or 'reasonable' compensation? It just says "they can find more lucrative deals". You seem to be projecting something onto the article that isn't there.

Just before where you found that quote the text is a link to another article that talks about those things.

You mean this? http://www.informationweek.com/government/cybersecurity/gove...

That link also doesn't say anything about long-term prospects. It does say it can't pay the lucrative amounts the private sector can, but that doesn't mean that the pay is 'unreasonable'. In fact, most of that article is about a mismatch of cultural fit, and has very little to do with remuneration.

And seriously, given how much of the hot talent in SV jumps around on a yearly basis depending on who provides the biggest bucks, does anyone really believe that "long-term career prospects" are going to appeal to those hackers? Do talented programmers really sign on to Apple because "I know I'll be a senior manager there in 20 years?

'Job security' is not the same as 'long term prospects'.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#53

Post by vacri »

Karnickel wrote: post #47
digler999 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> long term career prospects I doubt many young people even want "long term" prospects anymore.

I can't speak for any other country, obviously culture plays a role, but in Germany we just had an article in one of the top two news sites (and this is the much more reputable one of the two) [0] that says in a poll [1] 1/3rd of students said they'd like to become a "Beamter", which is a special status for life-term government employees who cannot be fired and have their own pension scheme. Job security was the numb…

A survey of the general population is not really appropriate for a hyper-niche demographic like talented hackers (the ones they want to hire). There's plenty of mooks out there who want to do the minimum work possible and unsurprising that a general poll would account for a lot of them. That's not to say that you are a mook if you want that, but that idea of a 'safe job' is not something that's particularly big in the hacker world.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#54

Post by gozur88 »

Hmmm. When I went to get a security clearance they said "When it comes to pot we don't care what you did in the past as long as 1) you don't lie about it and 2) you stop when you're working for us." If the FBI is hurting for people they can relax it at least that far.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#55

Post by morrbo »

This old fucking chestnut again. I am a pentester for a living, and have been for 10 odd years. No, the answer is not because they smoke pot. The answer is because governments across the world pay 30% of going corporate rates, and tend to be shitty environments filled with politics and work which most people of that persuasion might not agree with.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#56

Post by duncan_bayne »

xenadu02 wrote: post #30
iamdave wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to agree with you re: Whistleblowers & COINTELPRO, but was Clinton criminally negligent or just "Best practices were not adhered to" negligent? My impression from Comey's statements are the latter. Asking this genuinely, since I didn't read far into the story beyond said statements.

The email thing is just a conservative smoke smear. Reading the FBI investigation files makes that extremely clear... and obvious why she wasn't charged: no crime was committed. She even went so far as to avoid Colin Powel's advice on how to hide her emails from FOIA requests.

You realise the FBI has prosecuted people in the past, simply for the act of lying to them? Martha Stewart is the person who springs to mind.

Please bear in mind: I'm not a Trump supporter, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not a Sanders supporter either.

I just don't understand how anyone can look at the FBI's kid-glove treatment of Clinton and conclude that any 'regular' citizen would be afforded the same generosity.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#57

Post by iamdave »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #56
xenadu02 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The email thing is just a conservative smoke smear. Reading the FBI investigation files makes that extremely clear... and obvious why she wasn't charged: no crime was committed. She even went so far as to avoid Colin Powel's advice on how to hide her emails from FOIA requests.

You realise the FBI has prosecuted people in the past, simply for the act of lying to them? Martha Stewart is the person who springs to mind. Please bear in mind: I'm not a Trump supporter, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not a Sanders supporter either. I just don't understand how anyone can look at the FBI's kid-glove treatment of Clinton and conclude that any 'regular' citizen would be afforded the same generosity.

Yea but what 'regular' citizen would have, all else being fair and equal-anywhere near the levels of information that Clinton had without having conducted some activities that probably warrants less than 'kid-glove' treatment from the authorities?

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#58

Post by dalke »

morrbo wrote: post #55

This old fucking chestnut again. I am a pentester for a living, and have been for 10 odd years. No, the answer is not because they smoke pot. The answer is because governments across the world pay 30% of going corporate rates, and tend to be shitty environments filled with politics and work which most people of that persuasion might not agree with.

What's worse is the article even says pot smoking is not a major issue, with (emphasis mine):

"... the federal government is having a hard time hiring cybersecurity experts, largely because many hackers can find more lucrative deals that don't involve working for the feds. But there's another wrinkle: the FBI now says that its drug-testing policies are keeping experts off the payroll."

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#59

Post by wolfgke »

vacri wrote: post #53
Karnickel wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for any other country, obviously culture plays a role, but in Germany we just had an article in one of the top two news sites (and this is the much more reputable one of the two) [0] that says in a poll [1] 1/3rd of students said they'd like to become a "Beamter", which is a special status for life-term government employees who cannot be fired and have their own pension scheme. Job security was the numb…

A survey of the general population is not really appropriate for a hyper-niche demographic like talented hackers (the ones they want to hire). There's plenty of mooks out there who want to do the minimum work possible and unsurprising that a general poll would account for a lot of them. That's not to say that you are a mook if you want that, but that idea of a 'safe job' is not something that's particularly big in th…

> That's not to say that you are a mook if you want that, but that idea of a 'safe job' is not something that's particularly big in the hacker world.

The article is from German media. I can't speak for the US, but in Germany it leaves a bad impression if you switch jobs too often. Also in the last 15 years (in particular under the Schröder administration (from 1998-2005)) in Germany there were lots of reforms of the job market that lead to the feeling of many people that the jobs are much less secure and if you lose the job you will move downward socially much faster. This in my opinion explains pretty well why now lots of people want jobs that are more safe. And I see no evidence that this doesn't hold for hackers, too, since it is well-known that it is much more difficult to find a new job in the technology sector in Germany if you are, older than say, 45 years.

Re: The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)

#60

Post by duncan_bayne »

iamdave wrote: post #57
duncan_bayne wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realise the FBI has prosecuted people in the past, simply for the act of lying to them? Martha Stewart is the person who springs to mind. Please bear in mind: I'm not a Trump supporter, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not a Sanders supporter either. I just don't understand how anyone can look at the FBI's kid-glove treatment of Clinton and conclude that any 'regular' citizen would be afforded the same generosity.

Yea but what 'regular' citizen would have, all else being fair and equal-anywhere near the levels of information that Clinton had without having conducted some activities that probably warrants less than 'kid-glove' treatment from the authorities?

Any one of the Whistle-blowers who the current administration has prosecuted (or driven into exile, like Snowden).
Post reply on HN