Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio] • Hacker News Board

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#51

Post by embolism » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:22 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #17

hkmurakami wrote: post #4

I have some sympathy for the recruiters since they really have no say in the high level decision making in the organization. They may not even be involved with domestic spying of citizens. But on the other hand they continue to stay at the organization so while I do feel some sympathy for their predicament,I guess it's really just up to each person to figure out whether they're really okay with staying there, given a…

I have no sympathy. They willingly represent the organization. Nobody is forcing them to stay. They could leave, but they don't, thus implicitly accepting it.

Except that we don't really know what the organization does. We only have insinuations by Snowden and detractors against the US.

We do have evidence that they conduct massive surveillance could be unconstitutional.

We do not have evidence that they are abusing this, and more importantly we don't know whether they have been able to save lives.

It could be that the people who work there know about positive life-saving results from the work they do and that's why they continue to do it.

(Edit: downvotes are fine, but it would be nice to also see a single link to evidence that the intelligence itself is being misused as opposed to protecting people)

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#52

Post by jlgreco » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:23 PM UTC

Kylekramer wrote: post #33

mikeash wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no sympathy. They willingly represent the organization. Nobody is forcing them to stay. They could leave, but they don't, thus implicitly accepting it.

I imagine the fear of not being able to provide for you or your family takes precedence over privacy concerns for the vast majority of people. There was a news report about how 76% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck last week. I'd argue saying "they could leave" assumes a lot.

I thought the NSA hires only the best and the brightest. Why would they have such a difficult time finding new jobs?

Hell, I would even consider having "NSA xxxx - summer of 2013" on your resume to be an indicator that you are a person with backbone and a sense of morality. Bonus points right there.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#53

Post by malandrew » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:26 PM UTC

Posted in the other thread about this[0]:

    "This was a fun read and it seams like many people could 
    just DDoS the recruiting efforts of the NSA and CIA by 
    showing up to recruiting sessions and playing devil's 
    advocates. If you are well informed and good at internet 
    arguing, you are well equipped to attend these recruiting 
    sessions.

    At the very least it would plant the seeds of cognitive 
    dissonance in the minds of everyone recruiting for the NSA 
    and CIA. e.g. "Why do so many of the citizens we are 
    trying to protect not agree with our decision to do a job 
    where we trade liberty for security?"

To be clear, my suggestion here is not meant to prevent either the CIA or NSA from doing their jobs, but to help them remember that their job is clearly spelled out in the US Uniformed Services Oath of office, which AFAIK the CIA and NSA also swear to.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5983709

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#54

Post by jlgreco » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:28 PM UTC

gmisra wrote: post #44

It's rarely actually impressive to observe somebody attack lesser proponents of the ideas they disagree with. Sure, none of the actual decision makers will come within ten miles of an open forum, but this comes off mostly as just bullying.

They are publicly (mis)representing their organization, the line of questioning is more than fair. They are not somehow entitled to only receive questions that they planned for.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#55

Post by mjn » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:31 PM UTC

ajuc wrote: post #49

nugget wrote: post #25

As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and fait…

Even atheists must do the part with God?

As far as I know, it may usually (always?) be omitted. Oddly enough, it didn't require a Supreme Court decision, because the precedent was set with the first such oath: the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the first to specify a legal oath ending with "so help me God", and it at the same time explicitly included an opt-out clause, after which that has been accepted practice.

See Sec. 7 here: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=00...

The fact that this accommodates atheists, however, is a bit of a coincidence: such opt-out clauses were initially included because Quakers objected to swearing oaths to God.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#56

Post by colanderman » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:32 PM UTC

ajuc wrote: post #49

nugget wrote: post #25

As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and fait…

Even atheists must do the part with God?

I'd be surprised if the three-letter agencies don't screen out atheists. They screen in Mormons [1].

[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/11-surprising-things-you-didn...

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#57

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:32 PM UTC

ajuc wrote: post #49

nugget wrote: post #25

As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and fait…

Even atheists must do the part with God?

[deleted]

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#58

Post by eli » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:33 PM UTC

c0ur7n3y wrote: post #6

I have to imagine their recruiting is going to suffer greatly due to the recent revelations. Very few smart people are going to want to join an organization that spies on their fellow citizens. Plus, the NSA is going to have to be even more skeptical of anyone they do recruit.

Seems like it would only lead to increased reliance on contractors, no?

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#59

Post by jlgreco » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:34 PM UTC

mjn wrote: post #20

hkmurakami wrote: post #4

I have some sympathy for the recruiters since they really have no say in the high level decision making in the organization. They may not even be involved with domestic spying of citizens. But on the other hand they continue to stay at the organization so while I do feel some sympathy for their predicament,I guess it's really just up to each person to figure out whether they're really okay with staying there, given a…

It's a somewhat common problem faced by recruiters, with different levels of severity and different levels of justification. For example, in the '90s and early 2000s, MSR recruiters trying to get researchers to jump ship from academia got sometimes combative questions, especially from grad students, relating to Microsoft's business practices. In most cases the MSR representative had little ability to respond to those…

> When oil companies and defense contractors recruit in engineering departments, they typically don't get much flack. Maybe computer scientists have more of a idealist mindset.

Or more options. By the time a petroleum engineer student becomes a grad student they have probably either figured out that they will most likely be working for one of those companies, or they will have left the field for a more agreeable one. If they've got a problem with BP, chances are they have a problem with Exxon as well...

On the other hand, Computer Science students have a wider variety of companies they can work for. Disagreeing with one or two in particular is unlikely to push them into another field.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#60

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 11:35 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #17

hkmurakami wrote: post #4

I have some sympathy for the recruiters since they really have no say in the high level decision making in the organization. They may not even be involved with domestic spying of citizens. But on the other hand they continue to stay at the organization so while I do feel some sympathy for their predicament,I guess it's really just up to each person to figure out whether they're really okay with staying there, given a…

I have no sympathy. They willingly represent the organization. Nobody is forcing them to stay. They could leave, but they don't, thus implicitly accepting it.

[deleted]