I recall the original OSS included some more hands-on techniques, like throwing your files (the ones you grind with) into the drawer instead of laying them down carefully. I wonder what the equivalent in software dev. would be. Throw files into folders with a lot of force? Ddos? The legitimacy of this document has been questioned, but it is surely food for thought. And don’t call me Cherly
Simple sabotage for software (2023)
41–50 of 83 posts
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#42I recall the original OSS included some more hands-on techniques, like throwing your files (the ones you grind with) into the drawer instead of laying them down carefully. I wonder what the equivalent in software dev. would be. Throw files into folders with a lot of force? Ddos? The legitimacy of this document has been questioned, but it is surely food for thought. And don’t call me Cherly
(A pegboard or tool block could have easily mitigated any wrong handling of the tools?)
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#43The major thing that springs to mind here is I've never seen a compelling reason to believe that the original CIA suggestions actually worked. In my experience workers like that exist naturally and organisations are great at just sidelining them. I think in that section the CIA was just writing a listicle that sounded good [0]. The way to cripple a company is to get bad people promoted into management and have them o…
> [1] Yes, the irony here is that naive optimising for profit is typically not profitable.
Yes but only over a relatively long time period, which the overarching system itself is not incentivizing anyone to look at too carefully.
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#44The major thing that springs to mind here is I've never seen a compelling reason to believe that the original CIA suggestions actually worked. In my experience workers like that exist naturally and organisations are great at just sidelining them. I think in that section the CIA was just writing a listicle that sounded good [0]. The way to cripple a company is to get bad people promoted into management and have them o…
> I've never seen a compelling reason to believe that the original CIA suggestions actually worked. Let’s set asside the fact that the document wasn’t written by the CIA. The purported goal of this document was to provide practicaly applicable advice to the regular citizen who found themselves under enemy occupation. Most concretely to be given to the French people who did not like the German occupation. You are talk…
> Let’s set asside the fact that the document wasn’t written by the CIA.
What do you mean? The CIA has publicly stated that the document was written by the OSS, its wartime predecessor. [0]
[0] https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/the-art-of-simple-sabotage...
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#45I recall the original OSS included some more hands-on techniques, like throwing your files (the ones you grind with) into the drawer instead of laying them down carefully. I wonder what the equivalent in software dev. would be. Throw files into folders with a lot of force? Ddos? The legitimacy of this document has been questioned, but it is surely food for thought. And don’t call me Cherly
[dead]
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#46> CIA produced a fantastic book during the peak of World War 2 called Simple Sabotage. Not quite right. The Office of Strategic Services did that. The CIA was created only in 1947 several years after the end of the second World War in 1945.
> 4. Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible. Excellent. Continue the good work.
So while we're here: anyone know if Sonia Brownell ever worked with PWE before working with IRD? (or have suggestions as to where to look for this sort of thing?)
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#47The major thing that springs to mind here is I've never seen a compelling reason to believe that the original CIA suggestions actually worked. In my experience workers like that exist naturally and organisations are great at just sidelining them. I think in that section the CIA was just writing a listicle that sounded good [0]. The way to cripple a company is to get bad people promoted into management and have them o…
They do work, we had a director who did all that in a previous company (probably unintentionally), and things ground to a halt and productivity fell to zero.
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#48In a web context, I was thinking this when I checked out the web site of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) [1]; why would they use a thin, small typeface with light gray color on a bright/white background which makes the text less appealing to read? It must be subtle sabotage from within! (Some may counter this with Hanlon's razor [2]; Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)…
I find the EFF site perfectly readable. Not sure what you’re experiencing but it looks fine to me.
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#49> CIA produced a fantastic book during the peak of World War 2 called Simple Sabotage. Not quite right. The Office of Strategic Services did that. The CIA was created only in 1947 several years after the end of the second World War in 1945.
> 4. Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible. Excellent. Continue the good work.
Sorry, but i have to flag your comment.
1) dang has to decide whether this is too snarky or not.
2) Please stay on topic, its about CIA or not.
3) Its hardly "frequently bringing up irrelevant issues".
Have i missed something?
Re: Simple sabotage for software (2023)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 4. Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible. Excellent. Continue the good work.
Sorry, but i have to flag your comment. 1) dang has to decide whether this is too snarky or not. 2) Please stay on topic, its about CIA or not. 3) Its hardly " frequently bringing up irrelevant issues". Have i missed something?
A sense of humor?