Slashdot Mirror
Many Hackers Too Fat For The FBI
CaveDwler writes: "Want to work for the FBI in computer security? Better put down your cheesey poofs and pick up your M16. According to this article over on Wired, you have to pass physical requirements in order to work with FBI in computer security."
"They will not consider you unless you can carry your M16 through the physical fitness course without killing yourself in the process,"
I think its fair, if you die in the test, they don't hire you.
You can't take the sky from me...
...it's the bind-bogglingly stupid hiring practices in general. And the FBI know it; heck, even this article spends only a little time discussing the physical bit. Most of the article points out other ways in which the FBI shoots themselves in the foot:
At some point it will occur to the FBI that people can specialize in a topic before joining.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
How is playing Counter-Strike going to help me lose weight?
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
"In order to be a good computer security person, you must think like a black-hat hacker and be able to understand the tools and methods of the dark side," Sweeny said.
Oh great. So not only do you have to be able to run the obstacle course but you gotta be able to choke people from a distance and fight little green hyper midgets.
GMD
watch this
One question on the application asked if you'd smoked pot more than 15 times
15 times? A day?
IANAL, but imagine a beowulf cluster of in Soviet Russia all your belong are base to us welcoming the new SCO overlords.
Its always been my dream, to one day pull a gun and badge on someone and yell "Federal Agent, DONT MOVE!" or something cool like that. Unfortunately here in the UK theres nothing with any really catchy names, "Flying Squad" sounds lame, "MI5" sounds lame, the only cool thing i can think of is "Secret Service" but you would probably have to wisper it because its secret.. :( Even the police dont have cool 4-letter things like NYPD or LAPD. "Swansea Police, FREEZE!"
:)
I think its important for all geeks that want to join the FBI to get fit, and cherish their ability to pull guns and shout catchy phrases even if they have desk jobs. Mulder had to pass the physical, Scully had to pass the... mmmmmmm.. she definatly passed it
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Check out their policies http://www.fbi.gov/employment/policies.htm
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Don't be content to be a fat fuck, and don't let yourself off with "Gee, I'm just too busy to exercise" or "Exercise is for stupid jocks" excuse. There are better ways to flirt with death than to sit on your ass 18 hours a day chugging Dew and eating Ho Hos.
Here's my 20 minute-a-day, 4 times a week solution: Get out and run. Two and a quarter miles or so in about 20 minutes will put you in reasonably good shape. It doesn't hurt to squeeze in some work with free weights, either, but you can work up to that. In any event, start off slow and work up to your goal over a couple of months, and *don't* let yourself plateau too early.
Oh, and good shoes are really important. I highly recommend New Balance.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
.. it was the background check that scared me. What if I was a stupid teen and I did knock over a few mailboxes with a baseball bat [which I didn't..], would they use that against me?
So worse case is I don't get the job and then I get brought up on charges of some stupid thing I did in my youth.
"The Background will routinely encompass your entire adult life (age 18) and earlier years as necessary to fully resolve issues that arise. Information developed of a derogatory nature will be forwarded to FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., for adjudication."
How many people can answer these questions with a response of No?
1. Have you used marijuana at all within the last three years?
2. Have you used marijuana more than a total of 15 times in your life?
3. Have you used any other illegal drug (including anabolic steroids after February 27, 1991) at all in the past 10 years?
4. Have you used any other illegal drug (including anabolic steroids after February 27, 1991) more than a total of five times in your life?
5. Have you ever sold any illegal drug for profit?
6. Have you ever used an illegal drug (no matter how many times or how long ago)while in a law enforcement or prosecutorial position, or in a position which carries with it a high level of responsibility or public trust?
Live web cams
After flirting with exercise for about two years, I finally started working out on a seriously regular basis about four months ago (every weekday, 1 hour, rain or shine or apocolypse).
I find that I have increased energy and, as an extention, less need for caffine and a generally clearer head (esp. during those hours after lunch when everyone else is half-asleep). IMO, I absorb information much more easily and am better able to "wrap my head" around things.
As a bonus, I find that the time I spend working out (I run and lift free weights) is rivaled only by my morning shower in terms of inspiration potential -- you're concentrating only on the mundane task at hand, and your brain is free to dedicate extra cycles towards solving problems.
That's just one geek's observations; your milage may vary.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
They're not just ruling out the fat ones. They're rejecting all the ones that don't have a buff bod and those who wear glasses. Remember, a gentlemen agent not only has to be smart but has to be good looking enough to seduce the sexy Russian and Chinese evil hacker agents that he will undoubtably encounter in exotic locales. Don't you watch the movies, man? Everyone knows this shit!
GMD
watch this
At least to me. The FBI is in the business of finding and arresting the "bad guy". So it makes sense that all of their agents be in top physical condition and that folks work the street for awhile before specializing. That way the agents know how to put together a case from the ground up, and not have it kicked on a technicality.
That being said, I would think that they would try and increase their cybercrime fighting abilities by increasing the number of civvies they hire, and giving them more clout. Course with the egos involved that last one might be a bit of a toughie...
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
but don't forget that they want people who can do more then one thing. It's stupid to hire people that can do one and only one thing well in law enforcement. These are the people who need to be able to do a multitude of things to 'survive' at times.
They are just saying that you should be able to do many, things and may be required to be a 'normal' agent from time to time. If they actually get what they want is another matter altogether.
Maybe the computer job pays really really well compared to a normal agent?
>>I'd think the "college degree" required bit
>>would be a bigger limiting factor.
Not really. Universities churn them out by the thousands, every year. And many of them are quite buff, physically, emotionally, mentally.
When we read stories like this article, and hear about some overwieght, aging geek who got the wild
hair to go into law enforcement when it suddenly appeared lucrative, and was rejected, we are supposed to sympathize. Perhaps we should, somewhat, but we must also consider that despite the requirements, and no matter what hype you hear to the contrary, most Federal agencies are having no problems whatsoever finding qualified applicants. There are a lot of people out there entering the workforce. It appears to me that there was a little babyboom in the more-is-more 1980s, and those kids are coming of age. I wish there was a way to get credible census information in this kind of detail, but I'll bet $1 that there are more 18-25 year olds today than there have ever been in history.
In the case of the Federal law enforcement agencies, they usually have enough applicants just from former MP's, who have degrees, are physically fit, and have records that show distinguished military service.
The "average geek" will refuse to believe that a business major or enlisted soldier could be as effective in computer security, network administration, or programming than he, but it is merely a perception based on prejudice, and not necessarily based in reality.
I'm not even sure the "typical geek" would survive at all in a regimented, authoritarian work enviromnent. Quasi-military police work?
The story sensationalizes the "overweight" factor, but I believe strongly that the man being over 35 and just now wanting to go into law enforcement is a bigger red flag. You really should start that career at 20. Perhaps at 18, beginning either with a few years of military service or majoring in criminal justice or political science. When it's time to retire from police work, you'll probably have a law degree to fall back on!
But don't wait until you're almost 40, already burnt out, and THEN decide you want this type of career -- and if you do, don't try to blame not getting the job on your weight. There are a large number of factors working against this individual; the weight thing is just one; more of a symptom of the whole.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Two steps:
1. Recognize that your excuses are all self-defeating bullshit.
2. Work up to your goal.
Seriously, the only things keeping 99% of us from being healthy are the convenient little excuses we make for ourselves (some people have medical problem, but few are so serious as to preclude an active lifestyle).
Look around and tell me how many really fat 40 year olds you see. Now, how many 50 year olds? 60? Am I getting through here?
Being active gives you a lot of things: it makes you more physically attractive to most people, you'll have more energy, you'll fit into a single airline seat, you'll be stronger and generally more able to keep up with life, but the biggie is still this: If you're fat, you're going to die before you have to.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
There is, however, an M4A1, which is pretty much the same thing. It's a little smaller, and a little lighter, and it's what the army uses now anyway.
PUBLIC SPLIT ON WHETHER BUSH IS A DIVIDER -CNN scrolling banner, 10/15/2004
Maybe they want people who already know what the limits of what they can and cannot do are, and how law enforcement generally operates.
.com, either.
That way, the new guy doesn't bollux up an investigation by committing some mistake which a defense attorney can present as a violation of his client's rights and grounds for dismissal. They'd also likely have a better grounding in who and what you're dealing with, on the other side -- and it won't just be against stereotypical "black hats" getting their rocks off by DOSing some high-profile
At least, that's one possible explanation. Another is just that they cut-and-pasted requirements from their other divisions without being overly concerned about it. I'm not a Fed, so I wouldn't know.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
You might as well ask for politicians who have never lied. (That's a bunch I'd like to see take the lie detector test upon swearing to uphold the constitution)
Such politicians would no doubt pass with flying colors - because they're pathological liars.
The "lie detector" is not actually a lie detector. It is a "polygraph", graphing several physiological indicators of stress, so that a trained operator MAY be able to interpret them to determine when the subject is lying. And it operates on the principle that the subject will be under more stress when lying than when telling the truth - either from guilt or fear of being caught.
But a pathological liar won't be under stress. Because he doesn't CARE about whether he tells the truth. MAYBE he'll care about being caught - but maybe not - or maybe he understands polygraphs well enough to recognize that he won't be caught.
The "calibration" questions at the start are both an attempt to convince the subject that he'll be caught if lying (to cause someone who doesn't care to worry when lying) and to guage how much, if any, stress the subject exhibits when lying (so that pathological liars can just be graded "inconclusive").
I recall such a fellow telling me about his run-in with a lie-detector screening of a population at his job site, looking for a thief. Calibration in this test was to let him pick one of a set of three cards, put it back, then be asked "Is it the [such-and-such]?" and to silently think "No, it is not the [such-and-such]." Then the operator would tell him which card it was. The subject in question was enough of a stage-magician to recognize that the game was honest.
So as the three cards were turned, he thought something like:
"No, it is not the jack of hearts."
"NO, IT IS NOT THE QUEEN OF SPADES!"
"Yes, it is the king of diamonds."
The operator said that there was a curious little blip for the king, but that the card was obviously the queen. "GOTCHA!" thought my acquaintence, who had just been shown that he could beat the machine.
Not that it mattered since he wasn't the thief - he says, in a perfectly calm voice. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
What you said. It's a cultural problem.
Why not allow researchers the time/flexibility to pursue leads with publicly available information, and then pass that information on to agents to do the takedown stuff?
I can think of lots of ways to monitor areas of the 'net for suspicious activity (illegal types of pr0n, spam for illegal types of pr0n, traffic analysis of PGP-encrypted messages, and I'm choosing to ignore software/music piracy) that, while not necessarily actionable in and of themselves, would be the missing pieces that would make open-and-shut cases.
"Agent X, here's a letter. It doesn't matter that you don't understand a word of it. Take this in front of a judge. He may not understand a word of it either, but he'll probably authorize the request. The ISP will understand every word, and will hand you all the evidence you need to take $BIGNUM bad guys down."
(Come to think of it, aside from the legal boilerplate, the subpoena to the ISP need only contain three words: "grep", a regexp, and a filename. The regexp and the filename will depend on what department Agent X works for, but the approach is the same.)
Before anyone says that's unreasonable search and seizure, the regexps I'm thinking of can be based on publicly-posted or freely-given information such as IP addresses, timestamps, and other data given out by the suspect him/herself.
Investigators (maybe "investigators" isn't the right word. "Oracle" sounds nice. As in, the Agent asks the Oracle where to get leads for such-and-such a kind of case, and an anonymous voice from within the Oracle says "Start looking here") could be given $$$ bonuses based on the number of successful takedowns Agents made, and Oracles who provide too many bum leads get fired. Agents could continue to get the fun stuff like like kicking down doors and shooting badasses.
But the war on drug *users* has been a great success! Our prison population is about four or five times what it was twenty years ago, thanks to mandatory minimums that send drug users off for 20 years for possession.
The standard by which the war on drugs is a raging success is: Correction Corporation of America. They are our nation's sixth-largest imprisoner, behind the Feds, California, FLA, and so on.
Even better, CCA has no motive to rehabilitate their prisoners, since that might reduce the recidivism rate. If they rehabilitated drug users, they might work themselves out of a job.
Follow the money, the war on drugs is just another way to fleece the tax base (like when prisoners are mistreated at a private prison, the state who sent them to prison has to pay the damages, because the corporate entity is shielded.)
Check out nomoreprisons.org for more info. Not that I agree with all of what they have to say.
And kudos to America, the Land of Opportunity. The land where the same people who brought you the ease and convenience of the Colonel's Original Recipe saw that the War on Drugs created a market for privatised, for-profit prisons.
The chronic daemons out there would know that you might have to smoke pot up to 15 times before you build up enough of a reverse tolerance to get high. So, I'm guessing that the reasoning behind the FBI choosing 15 as their "magic number" is that if you've toked up that many times, then you must have gotten high at least once, but decided it's not your thing. People who could turn down weed after getting high off of it would then be less likely to care about defending its users or advocating its legalization than somebody who smoked the stuff continuously for a period of their life.
pi = 3.141592653589793helpimtrappedinauniversefactory7
Being a former member of the armed services that held a Top Secret clerance my entire career (and honorably discharged, before you ask), the "requirement" is there, but, provided that you are HONEST with your interviewers and stay off the stuff during your tenure, you will pass this part just fine.
The real source for trouble is financial dealings. If you've bounced checks, forget about it. Money, not sex, drugs, or ideology, has been the root of most espionage cases over the last 40 years.
At any rate, I was honest with my screeners, didn't touch drugs while I was in, and I had no issues with this area. Now, my ex-wife on the other hand...
Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
Interesting argument, that one is. One of the reasons the British intelligence agencies got penetrated so thoroughly in the 50s and 60s was because they made homosexuality a dismissal offence (as well a a criminal one).
This provided the Soviets with all the leverage they needed - because while homosexuality was still officially a crime, it was a crime to which a blind eye was generally turned. But agents could be trivially turned by supplying them with an attractive man, getting photos, and threatening ruin.
So on one hand, sure, recruiting agents who are squeaky clean can help make it hard for others to exploit them against you, having recruitment standards out of whack with social norms can arguably make the problem worse.
The FBI just does not want to pay for two seats when the fly you. It has nothing to do with caring for your health. If you croak early it is less pension forked out.
Table-ized A.I.
Running isn't the only form of exercise. I'm 5'9" and used to weigh close to 200 pounds. Now I weigh around 160. Four years ago I decided enough was enough and made some changes, some big and some small:
The point is, it didn't take a massive, up-front dose of self-discipline to point myself in the right direction. I started off slow and built up over time, and now I'm in the best shape I've been in nearly 20 years. I'm maybe a bit more stubborn than some, but fundamentally anyone could do what I've done.
If you start counting, and break out in the giggles halfway through, you probably won't pass, unless you can recover and explain what was funny about that time without ratting on your friends.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
At that point, if I were an Agent, I wouldn't want to be looking out for some lard-arse specialist, I'd like to know the guy doing the specialist work could cover my back in a firefight.
I know quite a few 'lard asses' (myself included) who could do a great job dropping the mouse and grabbing the gun. Heck, us fat guys better know how to shoot, we sure as hell can't run!
Besides, where do you think you are going to tap the LAN from? The dealer's closet? Just snake a cable downstairs or, better yet, let the gung-ho guys arrest the clown and take his computers back to HQ where you can crack them while eating your doughnuts and playing some MP3s...
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
It's discriminatory, dammit. I don't think being metaphysically challenged should present a barrier to employment.
Surely failing to count how many cans one has drunk or how much food one has eaten is in some way lazy?
I mean, noone made these otherwise sensible citizens drink all that sugar did they? They could have drunk diet sodas instead couldn't they?
Regardless of the reasons for be obese, people should take personal responsibility for their health.
It's not my fault, it's Pepsi's, honest!
You know even if someone has a genetic propensity for being overweight, they could still do a little exercise.
I do agree what diets will almost certainly fail. A permanent change in lifestyle, not some temporary starvation is the only long-term way to control weight or improve physical fitness.
It seems to me that in the western world (where I live), people are more and more likely to find an excuse for their circumstances outside of their own home. They had a bad childhood so they're bad people. They were poor so they steal.
Give me a break! I grew up poor and I stayed in school, didn't do very well, but am at least employed. I take complete responsibility for my life and my actions and my condition. Period.
Finally: if the next time you go to a restraunt they give you a bigger portion than the last time DON'T EAT IT ALL!!!!!
...The Close-Quarters Weapons System (CQWS). It's a variant of the M4A1 Carbine that will potentially replace the MP4-N (made by H&K) currently used by the Marine Corps. The primary difference in our variant is that it uses a rail system for adding just about any crazy little accessory that you could ever imagine (M203 grenade launcher, flashlight, laser sight, diopter sight, etc). The diopter sight is standard and I had the opportunity to try it out at Quantico's Weapons Battlion's range with the guys of the Marine Corps Scout-Sniper Instructor School (the FBI Academy is a half-mile up the road, ironically enough). I fixed their computers all the time when I was stationed there, so this was their way of thanking me.
The weapon is about as perfect as one could ask. And the diopter sight? Awesome. Forget iron sights. This little puppy has a suspended red dot and all you have to do is put the dot on the appropriate part of the target (chest-level @ 200M, shoulder-level @ 300M, head-level @ 500M) and you'll hit center mass every time. I even went crazy trying to get improper sight-alignment and/or sight-picture and miss - it didn't happen. If the dot appears to be on the target, you'll hit it. One of the best weapons systems I have ever used (other than the Mk-19: imagine a heavy machine gun that fires grenades) and I hope the Marine Corps adopts it.
"But don't wait until you're almost 40, already burnt out, and THEN decide you want this type of career "
What is someone over 30 and who wants to start a new career supposed to do, commit suicide?
Not everyone is 18-25, son. This forum's collective opinion to the contrary, there are over-25 yo's who can still contribute without wearing Depends.
We are likely to be the generation that will live to 100, hell, 120 or 150 years of age. If only 18-25 yo's, just fresh out of college, are the only people worth considering for law enforcement, or comp sci, or IT, or electronics, hell, anything other than McJobs, what the hell is the majority of the world's poulation supposed to do? Read Slashdot for the rest of their lies and weep that they are no longer 18 and fresh out of a good high school in the burbs?
This is a serious point. The population is aging, regardless of the Baby Boomlet kids of the 80's jamming up the employment pipes right now. The amount of ageism I encounter in real life and on fora such as these is also found in Human Resources departments I encounter daily.
Something's going to give here. Even with the H1B visa worker flood, there is a shortage of good talent everywhere -- good talent, not mediocre and hired 'cause they're young and fit the profile at HR. Ther's going to be 80 million or so aging Americans with no access to good jobs because of the prejudice and school snobbery of the Boomlet. With Social Sec killed by the current admin's "borrowing", where the hell is anyone supposed to make a living?
"You tried to use my comments as a bully pulpit to rail against everything from immigration to social programs, and that was inappropriate."
I agree with all your other points. I, basically, didn't write enough in response, so that my point would have been clearer. I tend to write-and-run, because this sort of thing takes a lot of time.
Not against immigration: merely realistic that the H1B relaxation of about two years back flooded the tech job market and closed up options for employment. This is a fact.
The admin: I did rail against them, but I don't think it was inappropriate or "political" -- the tax cut and the new borrowing to finance 6.5 trillion bucks emptied out the SocSec funds with prejudice. Stick a fork in it: it's over. So now we collectively have to plan on working past 70.
As for the purpose of arguing, I was not arguing the subject in the original article was correct, or you incorrect either. I was pointing out that, with a boomlet of yunguns, a flood of H1B's permitted, and age discrimination more rampant than in the '60's (another era of no-over 30's need apply), a person over thirty seems like a kid pressed up agaist a candy store window, with no hope of ever going inside.
Someone over 30 shouldn't try to be an Olympic runner, but going into law enforcement or engineering shouldn't be a problem. A 35-yo can learn calc a lot faster than a 18 yo: not as distracted by the opposite sex, at the height of their mental faculties, fr more motivated (because, grimly, and realisitically, it's their last chance!). But, realistically, as you say, there is almost no chance for employment for a 35-40 year old new BS in CS.. some, but slim and vanishing.
As you say, I am being realistic, but this is not a good situation for either you or anyone else. You're aging too, and you may need to change careers two or three times in your life.
In Chicago last year, there was a such a critial shortage of new police recruits that they upped the age limit to... 40. They finally got their recruits, and I hope it works out well. I suspect that the older men and women will do better than their younger counterparts, since they are more motivated to succeed.
In conclusion, I think my comments appropriate.