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

Spy Kids

foreignpolicy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Spy Kids

#11

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

finnh wrote: post #5

Charlie's argument is that the vast majority of people growing up today will not have sufficient loyalty to "the state" to fill the ranks of the state's spy apparatus. While I find it persuasive that people's loyalty to institutions may be in decline, that population-wide generalization is not dispositive for the hiring ability of spy agencies. You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You…

From what I've read it seems that both Manning and Snowden were gung-ho patriots when they signed up. When they signed up.

It seems in this end game the HR departments are better off picking the cynical, venal and power-hungry. At least they don't have the "disillusioned idealist" failure mode. But you may end up with a kakistocracy.

Re: Spy Kids

#12

Post by msg »

finnh wrote: post #5

Charlie's argument is that the vast majority of people growing up today will not have sufficient loyalty to "the state" to fill the ranks of the state's spy apparatus. While I find it persuasive that people's loyalty to institutions may be in decline, that population-wide generalization is not dispositive for the hiring ability of spy agencies. You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You…

"A" hires "A"; "B" hires "C". And Generation Z's "A" players will not work for the NSA.

You don't just need loyalists. You need loyalists who are good enough to operate your systems, who are also conscience-free enough to dissociatively split what they're doing from how they do it, day to day. And you have to have 100% accuracy to avoid the next Snowden.

Speaking as an engineer hiring for software, we are desperate for good people. It is a seller's market out to the horizon. "A" engineers will be picking among many options for at least the next decade, another generation of change.

I am at the head end of Generation Y. I have a nice computer job. And in my personal life story I have already voted with my feet against working for similar institutions. I can pick my post, more or less, and I picked one that doesn't offend my personal convictions about privacy and power.

Computer science does force you to think hard about bullshit. You can't bullshit a compiler. I remember thinking in an early experience with C, my code is right, there must a be a bug in the compiler. You get chastened in a hurry with that kind of attitude.

I guess I'm just saying there is a negative correlation between the anti-knowledge you get from Fox News and the sense of mastery you get from making a computer do what you need it to. So the future of the NSA is decay.

Re: Spy Kids

#13

Post by maxerickson »

echohack wrote: post #9
ansible wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And those people will always exist, helped along by talk-radio fear mongers who continually generate a stream of xenophobic, america-fuck-yeah types who will happily spy on their countrymen in exchange for that ever-elusive "secure job". I pity the fool who tries to build an effective agency out of those guys though. It will be a giant waste of money, and produce little of value to anyone. That's not to say that peop…

You mean the TSA?

They meant Uncle Sam.

Re: Spy Kids

#14

Post by DanI-S »

cstross wrote: post #3
67726e wrote: post #2

If you get hit with a pay wall to read this article, just Google "spy_kids_nsa_surveillance_next_generation" and you should get the article as the first result. Then you can read it from there.

It's a development and expansion of my original argument, expressed here: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/08/snowden-...

Thanks, Charles - for what is both an interesting take on the NSA's coming recruitment crisis and the best short range forecast of the evolution of Western culture I have yet to read.

Re: Spy Kids

#15

Post by rev_null »

echohack wrote: post #9
ansible wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And those people will always exist, helped along by talk-radio fear mongers who continually generate a stream of xenophobic, america-fuck-yeah types who will happily spy on their countrymen in exchange for that ever-elusive "secure job". I pity the fool who tries to build an effective agency out of those guys though. It will be a giant waste of money, and produce little of value to anyone. That's not to say that peop…

You mean the TSA?

I don't buy that the TSA is full of loyalists. I think it is mostly people who view it as a paycheck.

Re: Spy Kids

#16

Post by [deleted] »

ansible wrote: post #6

The USA, and by extension the three-letter agencies the implement it's policy has often been viewed as the World's policeman. If that's the case (and here we are about to stick our nose in Syria where it doesn't really belong), then it's time we started acting like real police. There's a whole bunch of rules for how police are supposed to act, how they determine suspects, how the collect evidence, and so on. It is we…

[deleted]

Re: Spy Kids

#17

Post by finnh »

msg wrote: post #12
finnh wrote: post #5

Charlie's argument is that the vast majority of people growing up today will not have sufficient loyalty to "the state" to fill the ranks of the state's spy apparatus. While I find it persuasive that people's loyalty to institutions may be in decline, that population-wide generalization is not dispositive for the hiring ability of spy agencies. You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You…

"A" hires "A"; "B" hires "C". And Generation Z's "A" players will not work for the NSA. You don't just need loyalists. You need loyalists who are good enough to operate your systems, who are also conscience-free enough to dissociatively split what they're doing from how they do it, day to day. And you have to have 100% accuracy to avoid the next Snowden. Speaking as an engineer hiring for software, we are desperate f…

Well, to some extent the systems are already written. And there will always be private companies that manage to hire top talent while still selling shady shit to govt. (palantir, anyone?).

Finally, it is absolutely the case that intelligence and morals do not go hand in hand. The history of the world is filled with counterexamples.

Re: Spy Kids

#18

Post by arethuza »

Any time I think about loyalty to organisations or countries I am reminded of what E.M. Forster wrote in his essay "What I believe" in 1938:

I hate the idea of causes, and if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend I hope I should have the guts to betray my country. Such a choice may scandalize the modern reader, and he may stretch out his patriotic hand to the telephone at once and ring up the police. It would not have shocked Dante, though. Dante places Brutus and Cassius in the lowest circle of Hell because they had chosen to betray their friend Julius Caesar rather than their country Rome.

[NB It is also worth noting that Forster was an associate of the members of the infamous Soviet spy ring started at Cambridge - although this wouldn't become public until a long time after this essay was written.]

Re: Spy Kids

#19

Post by frank_boyd »

finnh wrote: post #5

Charlie's argument is that the vast majority of people growing up today will not have sufficient loyalty to "the state" to fill the ranks of the state's spy apparatus. While I find it persuasive that people's loyalty to institutions may be in decline, that population-wide generalization is not dispositive for the hiring ability of spy agencies. You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You…

> You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You just need a couple percent, tops.

Or even less, if you take into account the fact that technology kills jobs at an ever-increasing rate.

Also, this trend will lower the "risk" of new leakers. Machines are 100% loyal.

Re: Spy Kids

#20

Post by MichaelGG »

msg wrote: post #12
finnh wrote: post #5

Charlie's argument is that the vast majority of people growing up today will not have sufficient loyalty to "the state" to fill the ranks of the state's spy apparatus. While I find it persuasive that people's loyalty to institutions may be in decline, that population-wide generalization is not dispositive for the hiring ability of spy agencies. You don't need an entire generation of loyalists to fill out the NSA. You…

"A" hires "A"; "B" hires "C". And Generation Z's "A" players will not work for the NSA. You don't just need loyalists. You need loyalists who are good enough to operate your systems, who are also conscience-free enough to dissociatively split what they're doing from how they do it, day to day. And you have to have 100% accuracy to avoid the next Snowden. Speaking as an engineer hiring for software, we are desperate f…

>have to have 100% accuracy to avoid the next Snowden

That's the classic security problem; you've gotta defend every attack but only need one attack to work.

But there have been spies that have sold information before, instead of publishing it. Spy agencies have had this problem for a long time. At least with Snowden, they know he's out. With other long-time double agents, they had to deal with leaks over many years.

Also, it's just silly to think that an org with unlimited money will have problems hiring technical talent.

Post reply on HN