Slashdot Mirror


NSA Risks Talent Exodus Amid Morale Slump, Trump Fears (reuters.com)

Dustin Volz and Warren Strobel, writing for Reuters: The National Security Agency risks a brain-drain of hackers and cyber spies due to a tumultuous reorganization and worries about the acrimonious relationship between the intelligence community and President Donald Trump, according to current and former NSA officials and cybersecurity industry sources. Half-a-dozen cybersecurity executives told Reuters they had witnessed a marked increase in the number of U.S. intelligence officers and government contractors seeking employment in the private sector since Trump took office on Jan. 20. One of the executives, who would speak only on condition of anonymity, said he was stunned by the caliber of the would-be recruits. They are coming from a variety of government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, multiple executives said, and their interest stems in part from concerns about the direction of U.S intelligence agencies under Trump. Retaining and recruiting talented technical personnel has become a top national security priority in recent years as Russia, China, Iran and other nation states and criminal groups have sharpened their cyber offensive abilities. NSA and other intelligence agencies have long struggled to deter some of their best employees from leaving for higher-paying jobs in Silicon Valley and elsewhere.

251 comments

  1. All my friends in NSA are looking by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is completely anecdotal; I'm a mathematician and I know a lot of people who work for the NSA. Almost every single one of them right now is quietly or not so quietly looking for other work. At least one of them has an undated resignation letter in their desk ready to go if they are asked to do anything that they find morally questionable (and this is someone who has generally defended NSA's actions in the past). The morale at NSA right now is in a massive slump.

    1. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Then he should have left after Snowden. Your friend is a liar and a hypocrite.

    2. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Good! If the NSA get destroyed as a side effect of Trump, then it was all worth it...

    3. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by pr0t0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe the bar for what is morally questionable for Joshua's friend is just at a different point than Edward's. While what Snowden revealed was awful, it wasn't entirely unexpected. It makes you wonder how much worse (and maybe unexpected) it can get if there's still a middle ground for Joshua's friend to operate in with a clear conscious.

      --
      I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
    4. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is completely anecdotal; I'm a mathematician and I know a lot of people who work for the NSA. Almost every single one of them right now is quietly or not so quietly looking for other work. At least one of them has an undated resignation letter in their desk ready to go if they are asked to do anything that they find morally questionable (and this is someone who has generally defended NSA's actions in the past).

      So, he was fine with Obama doing anything illegal, he's just worried about Trump.

      As someone else said, your "friend" is a liar and a hypocrite if he stayed on past Snowden's revelations.

    5. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure by this point, anyone with a conscience left.

      Posting "anonymously" because of your friends.

    6. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Notabadguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They've been looking since the Snowden revelations tanked morale. During Obama's tenure. In fact, it was in the news, here on slashdot with an almost identical headline, minus the trump bit.

    7. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Maybe they were waiting for a new president to get elected and actually fix the problems, and now that we have Orange Hitler they realize it's not going to happen. It's easy to call someone a hypocrite when you're not in their shoes and know nothing about the situation.

    8. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not everything the NSA (or other agencies) do is morally questionable, unless you're somehow of the belief that the entire business of intelligence is so. I spent several years working for NSA/CSS, and I was never asked to do anything remotely questionable. That said, I did not doubt that others were likely pushed to do questionable things in the name of the War on Terror. I liked to think that I would have had the courage to stand up and so no if I had been so asked, though I never was. Should I have quit, on the basis of a hypothetical, knowing that the work I was doing was actively helping save the lives of innocent people?

    9. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash: government spies sometimes break laws and the terms of international treaties as part of their job. There's a bit of "end justifies the means" there, and the rest of the government, and most of the public (maybe not here on Slashdot) is fine with that.

    10. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While what Snowden revealed was awful, it wasn't entirely unexpected.

      That's not damning with faint praise, that's just damning...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their situation is clearly the same as almost everyone's...they live month-to-month trying to keep up with the Joneses, and can't afford to be out of work for any small stretch of time.

      Finding a new job for anyone with tech knowledge should take a month, tops. Finding a job that's equal or more to an overpaid NSA worker...that takes time, and they've likely grown accustomed to that money and need to be making at least that to maintain their new lifestyle.

    12. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by johanw · · Score: 2

      There is a difference between "sometimes" and "continuously". The NSA is still using dragnet constructions on US citizens against the law.

    13. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While what Snowden revealed was awful, it wasn't entirely unexpected.

      No, it wasn't unexpected, but prior to that, there was plausible deniability. We all suspected, but couldn't be sure.

      Now we know (without any tinfoil) they routinely commit criminal activities against the people of USA, and since none of them have been arrested and charged, everyone can be pretty sure that it's not going to stop.

      Snowden hasn't even been pardoned yet. Right now, all we have are presidents supporting the NSA in its conflict against The People, and when your boss says "keep doing that" then you're going to keep doing that. Pardoning Snowden would be a no-brainer fundamental easy thing to do, whether you're going to actually have the org start flying straight, or even just pay lip service and continue the criminal activities under the radar. Until it happens, NSA is perceived as openly anti-American. If you work for the NSA, most people think that you're a crookl, even if you're just a receptionist with no power who never breaks the law.

      Yes, they probably do things for us. But they have this unresolved scandal. Nothing Nixon did could ever possibly matter until Watergate was resolved. Justice must be served.

    14. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      Huge difference between being aware of morally questionable behavior and being asked to participate. I would have kept my mouth shut and looked for a new job, but that can take time to find a good fit. But the moment I have to do something I fundamentally disagree with, I stand my ground and risk termination.

      Being fired for standing up for the Constitution sends a stronger message than just quitting and turning the job over to someone who needs the job and would roll over. Multiple terms creates the elephant in the room.

      Walking away is not the best solution if you're not directly involved, in every case. Take your nonsense somewhere with fewer logical thinkers.

    15. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by hey! · · Score: 1

      Wow. How is it that ACs all have mind-reading crystal balls?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    16. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      If the amount they are paid isn't keeping them there, they aren't overpaid. You fuck-up.

    17. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should I have quit, on the basis of a hypothetical, knowing that the work I was doing was actively helping save the lives of innocent people?

      Are you sure it did? It may be saving lives, or may as well not be, depends on the specifics.
      The provided intel may directly or indirectly aid actions from killing children/civilians/journalist in drone strike "collateral damage", to deliberately killing political enemies for "regime change" and such.

    18. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're already snitches and cowards hiding behind a screen and rationalizing what they are doing. This isn't Trump's fault.

    19. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 0

      evil org. if you think they do any good, you have been drinking their koolaid.

      how many spymasters do we NEED, btw? pretty much all govt orgs that 'police' things are spying on us, now.

      I fail to see how nsa has EVER 'kept us safe'. and due to their being untouchable and above the law, we'll NEVER KNOW, either.

      "just trust us. we keep you safe".

      yeah right....

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    20. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Huge difference between being aware of morally questionable behavior and being asked to participate.

      Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.

    21. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I fail to see how nsa has EVER 'kept us safe'. and due to their being untouchable and above the law, we'll NEVER KNOW, either.

      Then NSA is a dual-mission agency. They do SIGINT, but they are also tasked with ensuring the security of critical infrastructure. Some of this involves designing crypto protocols, some auditing nominally secure systems, and so on (for example, writing SELinux). It's entirely possible to be working entirely on this kind of thing. You're probably making the world a better place, even if the net contribution of your entire organisation might not be.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    22. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are standard equipment for ACs.

    23. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by bobschmagogee · · Score: 1

      Wait, doesn't EVERYONE who has any job have an undated resignation letter ready and loaded just in case? Maybe it's just me. And your guy.

    24. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While what Snowden revealed was awful, it wasn't entirely unexpected

      I can still remember the tinfoil hatter comments quite vividly. It was unexpected.

    25. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by geek · · Score: 1, Troll

      Almost every single one of them right now is quietly or not so quietly looking for other work. At least one of them has an undated resignation letter in their desk ready to go if they are asked to do anything that they find morally questionable (and this is someone who has generally defended NSA's actions in the past). The morale at NSA right now is in a massive slump.

      Yet they stayed after the Snowden leaks? Fuck your friend. Trump hasn't even hinted at anything like that yet your idiot NSA friend stuck it out through very real morale issues under Obama. Tell your shit stain friend his candidate lost and to grow some fucking balls and act like an adult. Do the job or get the fuck out. Or as my grandpa used to say "Shit or get off the pot"

    26. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by PontifexMaximus · · Score: 0

      Morally questionable? He's a bloody spy on average Americans since Obama took office. HE IS MORALLY QUESTIONABLE by occupation. Though, sounds to me like he's just another whiny ass liberal pussy who hates that Hillary lost. Shame we have an entire generation of entitled, whiny, immature, self-centered hypocritical moral bankrupts running things in the country.

      Dude shouldn't just resign, he should eat a bullet. We don't need people like him in the US now.

      --
      Pax Vobiscum
    27. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

      A lot, maybe half, of the NSA actually works on defensive security measures. They're behind a lot of modern crypto and implementation and actually push for backdoor-less crypto. The surveillance and analysis ends of the business get more publicity because defensive measures "aren't as cool".

    28. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When Trump took over, the world's most powerful surveillance system fell into the hands of a madman. The guy is paranoid, he seems to honestly believe that Obama has been organising leaks from his administration and other crazy things. He's probably compromised by Russia.

      We are way beyond Snowden now.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    29. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by jaymemaurice · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the basic Snowden TLDR summary; when huge mass surveillance takes place, the people who make it work have more access then limited by the controls put on top? That's a moral middle ground I could theoretically operate under.

      I could even operate collecting information for a government that that analyses information collected (damning or otherwise) to set policy and strategy.

      I would, however, quietly resign if I got the impression that strategy was actually set first without intelligence and that intelligence was simply being used a means for propaganda and erosion of human rights.

      I am not surprised that morale is low if upper management no longer cares about your departments work - sort of sends the message "don't care what you do because what you do is not important". Without a sense of purpose and a government wage, why stick around?

      --
      120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
    30. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Carnivore. Not a political invention. Any leader that would not use all tools available is worthless. The difference going forward is simply more of what has always been done. How does this turn into a name thing? Obama, Bush, Clinton or Trump. None are kings or dictators just one part of the machine. Changing the driver or operator doesn't change the machine.

    31. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, that's just wrong. It's pretty well-known that the NSA's salaries, which I presume are set according to the GSA schedules, simply cannot match those of the private sector.

    32. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by jaymemaurice · · Score: 2

      NSA is perceived as openly anti-American. If you work for the NSA, most people think that you're a crookl, even if you're just a receptionist with no power who never breaks the law.

      Yes, they probably do things for us. But they have this unresolved scandal.

      These thoughts make me think: Can the scandal be resolved without quantifying the things that were "done for us" or causing irreparable damage?
      Do people of similar thought believe in the construct of good vs. evil where evil is evil all the time and good is good all the time? Are some people predominantly evil or do you have to be to work for the NSA?
      Who or "what" would have to "go away" for the NSA to work in the interest of Americans for people like you.

      *Disclaimer, I am not an American

      --
      120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
    33. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "deliberately killing political enemies for "regime change" and such."
      In case you didn't know, we don't do that.

    34. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Neuronwelder · · Score: 1

      Considering who they have in charge, do you blame them JoshuaZ?

    35. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Neuronwelder · · Score: 1

      I agree. Some people find nothing worse than a guy telling the truth!

    36. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Then he should have left after Snowden.

      When faced with a moral quandary, to just quit and walk away is not often the best course of action. It is usually better to stay and try to fix the problem. We need ethical people at the NSA, and the public's interest is ill served by the best people leaving.

    37. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha, hilarious...

    38. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Everyone has a different bar; obviously, Snowden's and your standards are different from this unnamed guy's. It's not black and white.

      What's remarkable about this article is how apparently bad the morale is at the NSA now. So obviously, a lot of NSA insiders were at least somewhat OK with things post-Snowden (or with the things Snowden revealed), but now they're *not* OK with how things are going now with Trump in office.

      It's kinda like the Mafia: even they have their limits. They'll happily do "protection" rackets, prostitution, etc., but do something that victimizes young children and suddenly they're morally opposed. (A lot of hardened criminals are like this, which is why child predators have to be kept separate from them in prison.) This isn't to say NSA employees are like the Mafia or other hardened criminals, I'm just pointing out the parallel: everyone has different standards, and at some point can be pushed too far, or asked to do something that's beyond their morals, and that appears to be what we're seeing here.

    39. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, it's standard practice in this country (not sure about yours) for former political flunkies to hang around for a while fucking up the ne t administration until they can be replaced by people who give a shit about the country more than their former boss.

      Trump is not paranoid. Again. This is standard practice. It is well known.

      You are off your rocker and need some serious psychological assistance for your delusions of persecution and general paranoia.

      I'm guessing the healthcare system in your country will provide you care with no additional out of pocket expense beyond the high taxes you already pay. Try using the available services, they might help. Certainly you won't be any worse off.

    40. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huge difference between being aware of morally questionable behavior and being asked to participate.

      Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.

      I am glad that you bring that up, because it is a perfect example of why you are wrong.

      If Joshua's friend quits now, that is the equivalent of doing nothing. They are not involved in any of the morally-questionable actions, therefore their quitting is unlikely to impact any of those morally-questionable actions. It is not until they are personally asked to do something morally-questionable, that their quitting would have a real, measurable impact.

    41. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by TrumpShaker · · Score: 1

      "deliberately killing political enemies for "regime change" and such."
      In case you didn't know, we don't do that.

      Who is the "we"? NSA? USA? You and the turd in your pocket?

    42. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Spying on everyone in the country without cause is not morally reprehensible?

    43. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Enigma2175 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, they are pushing for backdoor-less crypto while simultaneously paying RSA $10 million to put a backdoor into their crypto? Yeah, we should really just trust these guys, I'm sure they would never use that backdoor for anything but pure good.

      --

      Enigma

    44. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I disagree entirely. Walking away is *always* the best course of action, unless you're in a position of power (and even that's questionable, because if you're the NSA director and refuse to "do your job" you'll probably be sacked).

      Decisions and policy always come from the top. If you're a low-level peon (as any engineer is; face it, this is not a prestigious profession with any real power), then you either do what your superiors tell you, or you resign, or you get fired. There is no "stay and try to fix the problem"; you do not have that power.

    45. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by tbannist · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Uh, it's standard practice in this country (not sure about yours) for former political flunkies to hang around for a while fucking up the ne t administration until they can be replaced by people who give a shit about the country more than their former boss. Trump is not paranoid. Again. This is standard practice. It is well known.

      Are these "alternate facts"? Because I don't remember hearing anything about this in the three administrations previous to Trump.

      You are off your rocker and need some serious psychological assistance for your delusions of persecution and general paranoia.

      Funny, that's my diagnosis of your post, too.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    46. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While what Snowden revealed was awful, it wasn't entirely unexpected.

      No, it wasn't unexpected, but prior to that, there was plausible deniability. We all suspected, but couldn't be sure.

      Now we know (without any tinfoil) they routinely commit criminal activities against the people of USA, and since none of them have been arrested and charged, everyone can be pretty sure that it's not going to stop.

      Snowden hasn't even been pardoned yet. Right now, all we have are presidents supporting the NSA in its conflict against The People, and when your boss says "keep doing that" then you're going to keep doing that. Pardoning Snowden would be a no-brainer fundamental easy thing to do, whether you're going to actually have the org start flying straight, or even just pay lip service and continue the criminal activities under the radar. Until it happens, NSA is perceived as openly anti-American. If you work for the NSA, most people think that you're a crookl, even if you're just a receptionist with no power who never breaks the law.

      Yes, they probably do things for us. But they have this unresolved scandal. Nothing Nixon did could ever possibly matter until Watergate was resolved. Justice must be served.

      Not at all. Trump hates them too, along with most of his cabinet, because of what they have to hide and what the NSA already knows but cannot make public.

    47. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 1

      Then he should have left after Snowden. Your friend is a liar and a hypocrite.

      Alternately his job has not yet had him doing things like Snowden reported.

    48. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell Milo to stop hogging all the black dick and save some for you.

    49. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by epine · · Score: 1

      Then he should have left after Snowden. Your friend is a liar and a hypocrite.

      But it's still three pay grades above being a troll and an asshole.

    50. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Government salaries do come with substantial pensions though. It would take the equivalent of a 7 figure nest egg to match them.

    51. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      not to anyone in Telecom, who spent 7 years before Snowden being propositioned by various men-in-black to build bulk taps for OC-192 rings EXTERNAL to co-siting with the Telcos to please build an undetectable transfer tool for the fiber

    52. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Tell that to Saddam Hussien, murdered to facilitate "Regime change"

    53. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like your friend has already done something criminal and is looking for a graceful exit without jail time.

    54. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct, it would be best served by EVERYONE leaving.

      We don't need any form of god damned secret police in America.

    55. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Not really fair to taint good NSA personal for corrupt NSA personal, unless of course the good ones see the crime and fail to report it. You are not responsible for the criminal actions of others in your organisation unless you fail to take action if you directly witness it. The good ones have to remain to keep the bad ones in check, they just have to have the integrity and grit to uphold the law.

      To be fair to the overall organisation, the corrupt ones know who the good ones are and do not involve the good ones in corrupt activity. The problem was the failure to split the NSA into defence and offence. There are plenty of good people that would work in defence but refuse to join the privacy invasive egoistic freaks in criminal attacks, corrupt activities and delusions of egoistic power by spying on others. The were told by many to do this but they refused and now pay the price. Split defence and offence and allow defence to target and police offence or else suffer further losses.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    56. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      I'm going to have to read Breitbart or Infowars to learn about all these Soros plans. Me and all my other Liberal comrades don't have a clue what are diabolical plans are. I'm afraid to admit I don't even know what Soros looks like.

      I should google him, since I'm doing his bidding.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    57. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Not everything the NSA (or other agencies) do is morally questionable, unless you're somehow of the belief that the entire business of intelligence is so. .... Should I have quit, on the basis of a hypothetical, knowing that the work I was doing was actively helping save the lives of innocent people?

      That is what JoshuaZ's friends are doing. It's a good point Anonymous made.

    58. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      It is. It's why new administrations usually get rid of people from the previous administration. An example of someone who didn't do this was Bush and that had pretty devastating effects for the country.

    59. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What exactly are the horrible Trumpian thing you *imagine* those poor innocent naive NSA angels have been asked to do against their deeply engrained moral codes?

    60. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a voting American citizen?

      If not, your opinion is as meaningless as it is ignorant. Just because *you* don't remember or pay attention does not mean it doesn't happen. Why the hell do you think all previous appointees are expected to resign when the new administration takes over?

      So dumb... who gives children like you keyboards?

    61. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      "We" is the NSA. You're thinking of the CIA.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    62. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by EmptyHead · · Score: 1

      Trumpian? Is that an adverb or adjective or both? I guess it would need ly on the end to be an adverb...

    63. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Tyrannicsupremacy · · Score: 0

      I'm sure you know all about the Koch brothers though.

      --
      http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
    64. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      No, they actually do not. Government jobs currently have the equivilent of 401k, where you pay into the program that funds your retirement. The pensions went out long ago.

      https://www.opm.gov/retirement...

      The retirement plan is ok, about equal to private sector, and the pay is pathetic. All a gov job offers any more is stability, and even that is questionable with all the budget issues recently.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    65. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Coren22 · · Score: 0

      Last I checked, the Iraqi government, set up by the vote of the people, tried Saddam in a court of law, found him guilty and executed him. How did the US murder him?

      Now, the US deposed him, but that had pretty damn good reasons behind is.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    66. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      No, the Iraqi government, SELECTED and VETTED by U.S. occupation forces, approved before being permitted to stand for office, with no public input to which PARTIES could stand, did as ordered
      Seriously, stupid ignorant bullshit
      Do you REALLY think Nori Al-Maliki was the choice of people do did not even see his name on the ballot?

    67. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by Coren22 · · Score: 0

      So, do you have any kind of proof for your assertions?

      The only assertion I will give you is that the vote did occur while the US military was in country.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    68. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Sorry. I'm not going to go dig up the now 14 year old NEWS FROM THE NATION of Iraq while occupied.
      Pity you haven't any facts backing your "Free election" claim.

    69. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Here you go, Bremer controls Interim government who authorize ALL candidates for the "Purple finger" "election".
      U.S.Military governor, Paul Bremer that is.

    70. Re: All my friends in NSA are looking by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Oh, and THIS, demonstrating how Bremer et al were hand picking the Interim Government who had authority to permit, or ban, any party or person running for office in that sham election

  2. Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Just Obama loyalists. Any time a new administration takes power, current people leave and new people come in. This is especially the case when a new party takes power.

    You'll also find those who support Trumps agenda joining the administration.

    1. Re:Obama Loyalists by JoshuaZ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not what is going on. For example, one of my friends who is looking to leave NSA has been there since the early 2000s. Also, there are very few mathematicians who like Trump, and a lot of this exodus is among the actual math people, not the administrators.

    2. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As you pointed out, it's completely anecdotal.

    3. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are probably the same mathematicians that predicted a Hillary victory and a climate change apocalypse. I say it's time to get some new people in there anyway, based on track record.

    4. Re:Obama Loyalists by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 4, Funny

      You'll also find those who support Trumps agenda joining the administration.

      Good to know that a cadre of Paula Beans will be keeping America safe from "cyber" attacks.

    5. Re: Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The kind of people who support Trump are mentally incapable of doing the work that the people leaving are currently doing.

      They don't generally have the faculties.

      Oh I do so love the leftists - "We are more educated than you!" mantra.. Where it might be true that leftist have more formal education on average (and it is) it does NOT follow that they are smarter as a whole. I've seen what passes as higher education and I can tell you that from this republican's perspective it comes with a HUGE liberal slant. The further you go in higher education, the more leftist indoctrination you get. It's hard to avoid.

      So my answer to this mantra of yours is this... Is it that liberals are smarter so they naturally have more education or that higher education makes one more liberal? I say it's the latter more than the former. Which makes leftist actually dumber because they fell for the indoctrination they got.

    6. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, there are very few humans who like Trump

      FTFY

    7. Re:Obama Loyalists by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As you pointed out, it's completely anecdotal.

      So, just like half the "news" in the mainstream media, eh? "An anonymous source" blah blah blah. If that is good enough, then surely a comment from a long-time slashdotter will do?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Right. Politically minded twenty-somethings (because that is the NSA's recruitment pool) who think supporting the current administration's policies would be a good long-term strategy.

      Yep. (checks watch) They should be crowding in any minute now.

    9. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice strawman you built there.

    10. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the science behind climate change is sound. the science begin hillariy's victory wasnt. these 2 things are entirely different branches of science.

    11. Re:Obama Loyalists by johanw · · Score: 1

      But even less who liked Hillary. Those dumbass DNC leaders prevented Sanders from becoming their candidate, and see what happened.

    12. Re:Obama Loyalists by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Nice strawman you built there.

      If anything it would be false equivalence. A straw man is where you attack an argument which wasn't presented. What I'm saying is that much of mainstream news is just anecdotes. So and so said such and such. And then some other so and so said some other such. If they're smart, they present them by asking a lot of leading questions rather than declaring what it all means before it's obvious. Then other people ask questions, and demand answers. In this way, the media can lead the populace to do good... or ill, as is more likely in this post-consolidation news landscape.

      Still, there are some media-related victories now and again, such as recent changes in administration at Davis and Berkeley (on a local tip for me) or more broadly, what's going on recently in Trump's cabinet. He's not getting it all his own way, and lots of people have figured out that they don't want to be associated with him, or that particular rogue's gallery. Even Faux News is now occasionally being critical of His Orangeness. That's the kind of thing that will change hearts and minds among those who seem most heartless and mindless.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re: Obama Loyalists by johanw · · Score: 1

      I'd say that does not really work for real studies like math, physics or astronomy. Where exam questions are not determined by political opinion.

    14. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. The science behind a "Hillary victory" was sound. The problem was with the data used, not the methods used to analyze that data.

    15. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because only leftist, Obama worshipers are talented at anything, including tech.

      You might want to step out of your bubble some time. Maybe you'll notice you lost the presidential election and failed to win back the congress. You might also notice Republicans now have a majority of governorships and states where both legislative chambers are controlled (almost enough for a unilateral constitutional amendment).

      Talk about out of touch . . . probably too much fake news.

    16. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The problem was with the data used, not the methods used to analyze that data.

      Dude, literally anyone who used the correct data was mocked and shamed publicly. Many polls changed their polling methods to line up with the other polls. When Nate Silver finally pulled his head out of his ass just enough that his chin could see the sun, he predicted like a 1/3 chance of a Trump victory. He was VICIOUSLY ATTACKED for that.

      The problem was the methods used to analyze the data, because the methods included demanding that everyone walk the exact same line and think the same thoughts. That was the method. This was to manufacture consensus, not only to win the election by convincing everyone else that a Trump vote was a waste, but also to try to bully the government into doing exactly whatever Hillary or her controllers wanted.

    17. Re: Obama Loyalists by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Except you have to take that 3hr Gen Psyc course, and the only instructor teaching it also teaches Intro to Gender Bias.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    18. Re: Obama Loyalists by cellocgw · · Score: 2

      Apparently you aren't educated enough to know the difference between being smart/intelligent and being educated.

      You pretty much proved the opposite of what you thought you were proving.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    19. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't present the MSM argument, you did. Hence, strawman. I suspect you were probably replying to a different AC, though.

    20. Re:Obama Loyalists by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Exactly right. As a Bernie voter myself, I completely blame Hillary and the DNC for Trump getting elected, and I will blame them for everything bad that happens during his term(s).

      This is definitely a case where your so-called "friends" are much worse than your enemies.

    21. Re: Obama Loyalists by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      I've seen what passes as higher education and I can tell you that from this republican's perspective it comes with a HUGE liberal slant.

      Only in the liberal arts college. I can tell you that higher education has no political slant whatsoever in the engineering college. There's no time for political bullshit when there isn't really enough time to cover all the useful factual stuff we learn in engineering. That and the equations that describe the behavior of a transistor don't care about your fucking family values, regardless of whether they're of the "manly men and women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen" or of the "sensitive men and women aren't equal enough" variety. The professor standing in front of the class certainly gave no hint what his (or in several cases, her) opinion was. If your answer to the boolean algebra question on the exam is, "Why is it either/or? I reject your hetero-normative culture!" then you fail.

    22. Re: Obama Loyalists by admin7087 · · Score: 1

      I have some ideas why you failed that psychology class...

    23. Re: Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet more people voted for democats in the presidential, senate and house elections - that's a fucked up system - and oh yeah if you add up the GDP of the blue states vs the red states it really wouldn't be a contest - so yes most of the skilled people who actually generate wealth are democrats

    24. Re:Obama Loyalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be due to the fact that the facts don't add up under Trump.

    25. Re:Obama Loyalists by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      How are you getting that less people liked Hillary? She has more than 3 million more votes than Trump did.

  3. Why Now? by PackMan97 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With Snowden and Binney and Drake before him...why now? It's not as if the stuff that these folks are being asked to do is changed in any appreciable way.

    1. Re:Why Now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think some of it is probably that it is easier to do morally questionable things when your leadership is behind you, telling you that you're doing the right thing. When your leadership doesn't give that reassurance, then you have end up asking yourself why you are doing something you find distasteful.

    2. Re:Why Now? by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, an agency like the NSA does do more than one thing, you know.

      This is called the selective attention fallacy. We all know that the NSA does many legitimate and non-controversial things. We just act like everyone there is involved in the controversial ones.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Why Now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the Stazi were great at catching smugglers too.

      There is absolutely a line to be drawn at what is "acceptable" and what isn't. Generally, I'd define it as acceptable for my government to spy on people (of any nationality) when they have good reason to believe that they are planning or in commission of a crime. They should have to argue this case to a judge, and the record should be sealed until the end of their investigation, or 10 years, whichever is shorter, and then disclosed in full to the target of the investigation, and in an anonymized form to the public.

      Spying on everyone "just in case" isn't acceptable. Permanent secrecy is not acceptable. Blanket rubber-stamping by secret courts is not acceptable. Mining social networks for trends that might indicate criminality is not acceptable. And some of the stuff that the other TLAs have been doing with intelligence from the NSA is so far from acceptable that it's amazing nobody has been up before a war crimes tribunal for it.

    4. Re:Why Now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the NSA invented SHA-1 which we now see is super insecure. I'm betting they did it on purpose so they can break SHA-1 digital signatures

    5. Re:Why Now? by jaymemaurice · · Score: 1

      From the media, we see a tone of "alternate facts" "I already know more" "these other people say" - how would you feel getting a government salary and you feel your work is not appreciated.

      The NSA is basically a government organization that is built around science and information. Their entire existence hinges on perceived trust, reliability and revolutionary information. I am sure there are uncomfortable truths that might often fly in the face of preconceived notions. I could see that morale would be a problem when the work done is not appreciated or its perceived to be met with closed mindedness or mistrust.

      In a climate where general civilian science and media seem to be under attack, it's hard to believe that it would go unnoticed within such an organization. I would also think that an open strategy to outright mislead the american public to believe this to be the case would still demoralize all but the most deeply programmed.

      --
      120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
    6. Re:Why Now? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, my point is that specifics matter. I don't think we should issue blanket condemnations of the NSA, nor blanket pats on the back.

      What they do is important, but also full of temptations for abuse. They're a lot like police in that respect. The police play a critical role in our society, but that doesn't make them beyond criticism, in fact quite the opposite. People on either "side" (the very notion of "side" is broken) can't seem to grasp the necessity for standards that are both tough AND fair.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    7. Re:Why Now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're called Stasi, not "Stazi". It always helps if you know what you're talking about.

    8. Re:Why Now? by hey! · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call it super-insecure. It was introduced in 1993, and it took 24 years for someone to demonstrate the first contrived hash collision. Twenty-four years is not a bad run. MD5 didn't fare nearly so well.

      Anyhow, we've known for years this is coming and SHA-2 has been available for ages. Not exactly much of a plot, in my opinion.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    9. Re:Why Now? by guises · · Score: 2

      One possibility is being told to do something wrong. Another possibility is being ignored or prevented from doing something right. This guy quit the CIA because Trump ignores the work that they do and instead makes policy decisions based off of whatever nonsense he reads on Breitbart. That's gotta be pretty demoralizing.

    10. Re:Why Now? by Agripa · · Score: 2

      Well, an agency like the NSA does do more than one thing, you know.

      This is called the selective attention fallacy. We all know that the NSA does many legitimate and non-controversial things. We just act like everyone there is involved in the controversial ones.

      Sure the NSA does more than one thing. One part of the agency subverts encryption systems. Another part of the agency pretends to secure encryption systems while helping the other part subvert them. Even NIST managed to get dragged into providing a false sense of security at the cost of their own reputation.

  4. AKA fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Fake news" == "News I don't like" or something.

  5. This happens with every change in administration by El+Cubano · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The "same" thing happened when Obama was elected. Bush had significantly expanded many intelligence programs and there lots of folks in the intelligence community who feared that Obama's campaign focus on closing Guantanamo and pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan along with his focus on transparency and civil liberties meant that he would gut the entire community and all of its big programs.

    They were wrong. It wasn't long before morale rebounded when people figured out Obama wasn't going to drastically shake things up.

    Now, I think Trump, given his personality and what he has done so far, is more likely to shake things up then Obama was, but in the end this will end up being something that we point to the next time the administration changes and there is a story about people in the intelligence community fearing changes suffer a morale slump and start thinking about leaving.

    Heck, the intelligence community loses way more people to the private sector because of things like "I can keep my phone with me at my desk," "I can talk about my work in public", and "I don't have to deal with the insanity that is government bureaucracy" way more than "the president might ask me to do something I find objectionable."

    The truth is that the intelligence has a very robust oversight apparatus and you don't have to look very hard to see that congress actually like holding the intelligence community accountable. Are there abuses? Definitely, just like with anything else. However, they are about as common as instances of actual voter fraud. In addition to that, if Trump gets the defense budget increases he is seeking, that will translate directly into increased funding for the intelligence community, which will likely improve morale overall.

  6. Fake headline is fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFA
    "The problem is especially acute at NSA, current and former officials said, due to a reorganization known as NSA21 that began last year and aims to merge the agency's electronic eavesdropping and domestic cyber-security operations.

    The two-year overhaul includes expanding parts of NSA that deal with business management and human resources and putting them on par with research and engineering. The aim is to "ensure that we're using all of our resources to maximum effect to accomplish our mission,” NSA Director Mike Rogers said.

    The changes include new management structures that have left some career employees uncertain about their missions and prospects. Former employees say the reorganization has failed to address widespread concerns that the agency is falling behind in exploiting private-sector technological breakthroughs."
    http://observer.com/2016/02/re...

  7. draining the swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gravy train is over folks

  8. No reason to fear. by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that they have nothing to worry about. They'll have plenty of opportunity to keep spying on the American people under Trump.

    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    1. Re:No reason to fear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that they have nothing to worry about. They'll have plenty of opportunity to keep spying on the American people under Trump.

      Surveillance of Americans is a very small part of what the NSA does (from what I can tell), but Trump has very vocally supported this kind of thing, so expect it to increase.

      When the FBI used a court order to compel Apple to decrypt the San Bernadino shooter's iPhone, Trump encouraged people to boycott Apple if they wouldn't decrypt the phones. This was when Apple was leading a charge to resist court-ordered decryption.

      Trump has expoused very authoritarian, pro-surveillance, pro-law enforcement, anti-encryption views, so it's funny to see libertarian types on Slashdot support him.

    2. Re:No reason to fear. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      When the FBI used a court order to compel Apple to decrypt the San Bernadino shooter's iPhone, Trump encouraged people to boycott Apple if they wouldn't decrypt the phones. This was when Apple was leading a charge to resist court-ordered decryption.

      Apple did not resist court-ordered decryption. They cooperated with the FBI even without a warrant to decrypt a single phone, they only objected when the FBI failed to follow their instructions correctly, locked the phone even more, and demanded the ability to decrypt any iPhone without oversight.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:No reason to fear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, it's conflicted messaging. How can it be, at one and the same time, that "Trump has expoused very authoritarian, pro-surveillance, pro-law enforcement, anti-encryption views,..." And yet, "... [TLA analyst] interest stems in part from concerns about the direction of U.S intelligence agencies under Trump"?

      It's not impossible of course but these do seem to be conflicted directions. Is there some extremely well-hidden reservoir of morality, Constitution respect and professionalism that rejects bureaucratic overreach, law breaking in the name of "terrorism", and empire building? Inside the NSA?!

      Nah.

  9. Re:Outsourcing will take there place... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Fake news much? Despite all the alleged help from the intelligence community, the DNC newsletter CNN still hasn't proven squat. The way Putin walked all over Obama for all these years, it's likely to be Obama who's the Russian plant all along.

  10. Re:Outsourcing will take there place... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Great, that way nothing changes, it's going to be the same people doing the work!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Ambiguous headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Highly ambiguous headline. Reads as though Trump is concerned about it.

  12. Your friend is a liar and a hypocrite. by handbagsmsn · · Score: 0

    Your friend is a liar and a hypocrite. http://www.handbagsyou.com/

  13. This started BEFORE Trump by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FTA:

    "The problem is especially acute at NSA, current and former officials said, due to a reorganization known as NSA21 that began last year and aims to merge the agency's electronic eavesdropping and domestic cyber-security operations."

    "The changes include new management structures that have left some career employees uncertain about their missions and prospects. Former employees say the reorganization has failed to address widespread concerns that the agency is falling behind in exploiting private-sector technological breakthroughs."

    "Some NSA veterans attribute the morale issues and staff departures to the leadership style of Rogers, who took over the spy agency in 2014 with the task of dousing an international furor caused by leaks from former contractor Edward Snowden."

    But you have to love how Reuters concludes the article:

    "Trump's criticism of the intelligence community has exacerbated the stress caused by the reorganization at the NSA, said Susan Hennessey, a former NSA lawyer now with Brookings Institution."

    You do realize Reuters, he wasn't the cause....

    1. Re:This started BEFORE Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, let's just say that it's safe to assume that Trump's win and his overt disregard for the intelligence community cannot have been a very strong morale boost either...

    2. Re:This started BEFORE Trump by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, from what I gather from people I know at NSA, the reorg is a huge pain. They're also moving a lot of people to new office spaces... did I say offices? I meant cubicles. And for a white-collar force where one of the previous perks was semi-private office space, that's a big deal. Did I also mention that the pay isn't that great compared to private sector (hundreds of thousands less, sometimes)?

    3. Re:This started BEFORE Trump by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I wish I had a cubicle...

      In the private sector, open-plan offices are all the rage these days.

  14. I think one thing is easy to overlook... by RyanFenton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know there's been a lot of back-and-forth about Trump.

    But the way most everyone in the world views him, is that he has always been, and remains the living symbol of arrogance and greed. Trump does not serve the United States of America, the USA functionally serves Trump as it stands.

    Working in any position where you were spending your life promoting that would suck. It's painful enough that an otherwise wonderful nation elected that dude.

    Yes, defending Ameirca is crucially important, and our nation still stands for a lot of very important principles, but when all of that sits in service to, well, Trump, it would be very difficult to not want to go off and help it some other way.

    I empathize with the folks making those choices.

    Ryan Fenton

    1. Re:I think one thing is easy to overlook... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks Ryan!

      I'll be thinking of your post the next time I pinch a loaf.

      Had nothing to do with this article.

    2. Re:I think one thing is easy to overlook... by houghi · · Score: 1

      and our nation still stands for a lot of very important principles,

      Could you please elaborate what those principles are?
      It can't be democracy, because people always say that the US isn't a democracy, but a Republic. It also can't be freedom of speech, as POTUS banned the press. Guns are allowed in many countries, so that can't be it either.

      So what are these principles you talk about?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:I think one thing is easy to overlook... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, plenty of people view him as just the type of person America needs to have at the helm. Not perfect, but an improvement over his predecessor. And some of them will join up at the NSA in the next few years.

  15. And this is bad how exactly? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    How could anyone possibly spin this as a bad thing? If Trump does nothing else this would be a win for the American people and the rest of the world as well.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    1. Re:And this is bad how exactly? by coolmoe2 · · Score: 1

      Um... Right offhand my first thought is "Who are they going to work for next". You might not like the NSA but if all of their top talent goes elsewhere it could be a very serious problem for us. Imagine what would have happened if during the development of the atomic bomb if all of the talent would have went to work for someone else? Do you think that scenario would have worked out for us?
      Just food for thought.

    2. Re:And this is bad how exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm .. just a guess .. perhaps we wouldn't have had Hiroshima and the cold war?

    3. Re:And this is bad how exactly? by coolmoe2 · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps the soviets would have developed them first and became the dominant player. Remember its not like we were the only country working on that tech at the time.

    4. Re:And this is bad how exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember Paul Bremer? Bush W's guy who fired the entire Iraqi army and sent them home with guns and no paychecks?

      Instant insurgency with a possible 400,000 members.

      This is the problem with the Trump White House. A lot of people don't want to be associated with the guy, and the people Bannon and Gorka and Miller get to backfill open positions will be ideologically pure but maybe not qualified.

      And I'm not sure how I feel about Bannnon/Gorka/Miller followers having access to everyone's data to begin with.

    5. Re:And this is bad how exactly? by Noble713 · · Score: 1

      Right offhand my first thought is "Who are they going to work for next". You might not like the NSA but if all of their top talent goes elsewhere it could be a very serious problem for us.

      Not really. In all likelihood they'll go work for private security contractors that specialize in intelligence, but give the US government the plausible deniability it has lost due to checks & balances. A high-level US security clearance carries a LOT of value for employees. Very few people would throw away .gov/DoD private contractor opportunities to go work for Russia/China/etc. for anything less than millions of dollars, IMO.
      http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...

  16. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Stop being so damned reasonable.

    This is another opportunity to blindly bash Trump and up our leftist street credentials with no evidence whatsoever, just some anonymous reports with no numbers in them which can't be refuted or intelligently discussed because this entire story is completely anecdotal.

    Anecdotal trumps Trump! Or something like that.

    Now where's the slashdot story about how Bill Nye got schooled by Tucker Carlson over global warming? We haven't given the mindless left a chance to down mod intelligent people over climate change on slashdot in a while.

  17. Fine with me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let the partisans leave and go somewhere else. For places like the NSA, it seems the best worker would be non-partisan (while at work) and not actively trying to sabotage the administration.

  18. How is this a bad thing? by Syncerus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not to be a smartass, but do we really want our best and brightest in the NSA? Whether you are politically left, right or agnostic, the surveillance state should be a serious concern for all those who value privacy and liberty. This isn't a Bush, Obama or Trump thing: this is an individual rights thing.

    --
    "Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
    1. Re:How is this a bad thing? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not to be a smartass, but do we really want our best and brightest in the NSA?

      Not with the lack of transparency in our government in general. The idea of securing the nation's communications is a good one. Unfortunately, the NSA does ever so much more than that.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:How is this a bad thing? by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1

      Yes. We do.

      Why? Because other countries will force recruit and blackmail their best and brightest and we (at least nominally) depend upon our best and brightest to do so under their own free will.

      The DNC emails being hacked so easily by a simple typo and a phishing attempt is a perfect example. Google's Gmail security is better than the DNC's with two-factor authentication and warnings sent to your backup account when someone logs into your account from somewhere suspicious.

    3. Re:How is this a bad thing? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      The "typo" is just a CYA retcon of the facts, because it's really bad for your career to admit the truth in these kind of situations.

      You are also assuming that the actions of our intelligence agencies align with the interests of the American people at large, but the reality is that very often they are mostly serving the oligarchy, and I'm not really bothered if they are hurt by foreign spies.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    4. Re:How is this a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    5. Re:How is this a bad thing? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Whether you are politically left, right or agnostic, the surveillance state should be a serious concern for all those who value privacy and liberty.

      Which is who? Not very many Americans, as proven by all the people who use Twitter and Facebook and happily make themselves dependent on monopolistic corporations.

      Face it; no one cares about privacy any more.

    6. Re:How is this a bad thing? by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Not to be a smartass, but do we really want our best and brightest in the NSA?

      What's the alternative - investment banking? Delivering ever more manipulative advertisements at an internet company?

  19. talent ? by stooo · · Score: 1, Funny

    >> NSA Risks Talent Exodus Amid Morale Slump, Trump Fears

    NSA has talent ?

    --
    aaaaaaa
  20. GOOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps their talents can help build something useful.

  21. Re:All my friends in NSA are looking tsarkonx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So in these supposed dark times these deep state traitors get up and leave? And they sat through manning, snowden, dotcom and assange but now someone new gets elected and they throw a seditious traitorous treasonous tantrum? I spit on you and I spit on your friend and I hope these deep state globalist traitors not only leave the NSA but go the fuck to hell.

  22. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give me a break. A robust oversight apparatus didn't stop the metadata collection. A robust oversight apparatus didn't stop the CIA's most egregious crimes against humanity. A robust oversight apparatus that didn't wonder at all if the practice of using the UK's intelligence agencies to get around constitutional limits on domestic spying is okay.

  23. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Trump administration is very different. At least, the security and intelligence communities think so.

    In a Christian Science Monitor poll of "influencers" in this space (November 2016), 27% thought the Trump admin. would improve cybersecurity, and 73% thought it wouldn't. If you read the comments, many of the 27% said essentially they thought cybersecurity is such a serious topic that the administration would be forced to improve things.

    More to the point of this article, here is a quote, in which Peter Singer states exactly the problem. He is a big thinker in the cyberwar / nation-state cybersecurity space:

    “Set aside the lack of understanding (10-year-old sons excluded) and turning a blind eye to Russian role in an attack on American institutions, the real damage may be on the people side,” says Peter Singer, strategist and senior fellow at New America think tank. “It is hard enough for government to recruit and retain talent, especially in a field like cybersecurity. It just got bigly harder.”

    Personally, I'm in a graduate-level infosec program that included a class in advanced exploitation. We participated in the NSA Codebreakers Challenge, and I did very well. I was seriously considering working for the NSA until Trump won. I suspected then (and now) that he is an incompetent manager who will damage all federal agencies. I was also concerned that I would build weapons he would then hand over to Russia.

    As a final note, the metadata monitoring reported by Snowden appears to be a very small piece of what the NSA does. In the 2016 Codebreaker Challenge, we were given software that used cryptography to remotely detonate improvised explosives, and we were tasked with reverse engineering and cracking it. This is the kind of signals intelligence that is within the NSA purview.

  24. Wonderful News! by Archtech · · Score: 1, Funny

    "One of the executives, who would speak only on condition of anonymity, said he was stunned by the caliber of the would-be recruits. They are coming from a variety of government intelligence and law enforcement agencies..."

    So yet again Mr Trump has come up trumps! He is already delivering on his promise to stimulate the business sector and create jobs. here are large numbers of America's most brilliant minds, being prized out of dead-end, stultifying jobs in a government bureaucracy that performs no useful function (and might, if given its head, kill us all) and made available to the private sector. There they can help corporations expand and employ more people; boost the GDP; and earn far more for themselves and their families.

    This is as close to a "no downside" result as any government could ever produce.

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  25. Hello from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couple of points:

    1. The talented people that can find better work elsewhere (Silicon Valley and elsewhere) and wanted to leave are already gone. They left under Obama. Not because of Obama, but because of the morale slump from Snowden's revelations.

    2. The talented people that can find better work elsewhere but are patriotic are staying because they feel like their work is important.

    3. The same people who whined and groaned under Obama and from the Snowden debacle are still whining and groaning about Trump. They'll be whining and groaning under the next president too - except they're not the talent, or they'd be gone.

    1. Re:Hello from the NSA by DakotaSmith · · Score: 1

      I'm fascinated by the concept of a "morale slump" after someone revealed to the world how evil the NSA is.

      I've seen the cages in Facebook and Microsoft's Des Moines data centers with my own eyes. They capture any and all data -- inbound and outbound -- and (I assume) sends it to Utah for permanent storage.

      Tell me this isn't utterly evil.

      The NSA is evil. Its employees are not doing important work: they are evil.

      The NSA should be immediately disbanded. The Oak Ridge facility apparently working on cracking PGP should be destroyed with bunker-busters and reduced to sand and ash.

      The Utah data center is an entirely different matter. When you have enough estimated storage for all the pertinent information on every human being on the planet, you've descended into near-dictatorial waters.

      The Utah facility needs an end that sends a message to all of humanity for all time:

      Nuke it.

      Then pass a Constitutional Amendment to re-nuke it every July 4 of the nation's Centennial. There needs to be a permanent, radioactive hell as a warning to all future generations everywhere that a free society never, ever builds anything that horrifically evil,

      Then start rounding up any and all NSA employees who can be proved to have spied on Americans and try them for treason.

      The NSA is pure, unadulterated evil. Those who work there may have convinced themselves they're patriots, but they're not. The patriotic thing would be to quit in disgust.

      The NSA is evil. And you'll not that despite the fact that I know this thread is being captured; and that it can be tied to my real name if you try hard; and that I'm replying to someone who has deluded themselves about the NSA; that there is every possibility this post will be reported to or flagged by the NSA.

      I don't care. The NSA is evil and the people who work there are the worst sort of scum. The sooner the NSA and its various appariti are forever destroyed, the better.

      --
      Microsoft leads to Bluescreen; Bluescreen leads to downtime; downtime leads to suffering.
    2. Re:Hello from the NSA by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The NSA is evil. Its employees are not doing important work: they are evil.

      The NSA is a huge organisation with a dual mission. They are tasked with protecting critical infrastructure and being able to attack other people's critical infrastructure. These are fundamentally contradictory (you find a zero-day vulnerability in something like OpenSSL: mission 1 requires that you disclose it and get it fixed ASAP to protect your infrastructure, mission 2 requires that you keep is secret so that you can use it to attack everyone else) and as such they're largely isolated into different parts of the organisation. Even if you completely disapprove of mission 2, arguing that mission 1 is not important work and is inherently evil makes you seem like an idiot.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Hello from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks a lot, this helps me with a German novel I'm currently writing which is starring a female NSA mathematician. Yes, I know, female mathematician - probably not very realistic, but needed for dramatic reason. Anyway, she's very patriotic. :)

    4. Re:Hello from the NSA by admin7087 · · Score: 1

      I may be wrong but AFAIK NSA is only tasked with protecting military infrastructure and a few critical government facilities as external "clients", so the two tasks are not as contradictory as they may seem. They're not tasked with making Internet Explorer more safe unless it's used by Sergeant Joe Plumber on a nuclear submarine.

    5. Re:Hello from the NSA by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      It's military and government infrastructure and it turns out that a lot of government infrastructure runs on commodity hardware and software (actually, so does a lot of military stuff). This means that they end up auditing a lot of proprietary and open source code that's widely deployed. This is why Heartbleed was so embarrassing for them: OpenSSL was explicitly on the list of 'critical infrastructure' software that they're meant to be securing.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  26. Utterly disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The people that are leaving or considering leaving are dishonest hacks.

    If we assume this article is true, none of them has any integrity whatsoever.

    If what you're doing is right, it's right regardless of who you're doing it under. If what you're doing is wrong, it's wrong regardless of who you're doing it under.

    It can't be right under Obama and wrong under Trump. If you're doing it because you think it's the right thing to do, you grit your teeth and bear it.

    You should not be doing these illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral acts. And you know it. You know it because you're leaving.

    The biggest problem here is that this creates a huge hole for people that want to abuse the unconscionable amount of power collected. These unelected people are now going to have access to everything about your senators, representatives, etc. How many of them will have scruples about getting their way? Even assuming they do, how can you be so sure that future waves will be the same? The plain fact is that this abuse is unprecedented in scale and scope and will have ramifications. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

    You should not have this power in the first place, but even so, you're irresponsibly wielding it by abdicating it to others. Sleeping at night would be temerity.

    1. Re:Utterly disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that Trump isn't planning to abuse intelligence agencies politically, but all the signs suggest he's going to do so. Moreover, who would work for an agency that carefully collects information, analysis and facts, only to subsequently present it to mentally ill scum like Steve Bannon?

  27. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by whoever57 · · Score: 2

    The truth is that the intelligence has a very robust oversight apparatus and you don't have to look very hard to see that congress actually like holding the intelligence community accountable

    Did I miss some sarcasm in that post? Or are you serious?

    If you are serious, then you clearly are not reading the news. There is no effective oversight of the intelligence community by Congress. Just look at what happened with the CIA torture report, or Clapper lying to Congress and suffering no consequences for his lies. Read or listen carefully to what Senator Wyden is saying about the intelligence community: if he expresses concern that something may be happening, then it is.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  28. Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Before I begin, I will say that my opinion would be the exact same no matter which party held the office. The NSA is not supposed to be a political entity, it is supposed to serve the American people as a whole. Any person in any agency that refuses to support the current administration should absolutely leave, and do so in a hurry. Any person in the agency being forced to work against the interests of the current administration should blow the whistle on the people making demands which harm the Country.

    While we have seen some churn in every administration change, what I notice quite differently with this one is that agencies believe it's okay to damage the country instead of just leaving their job. I spent a decade working DOD and experienced numerous administration changes. Taking a crap on administration was never before seen as okay, yet that is what the current leaks are designed to do.

    Another anecdote to consider is that my family was mostly Democratic party members. The behavior of the Democratic party for the last several months has pushed every single one of them away. The current behavior has turned them into enemies of the Democratic party. That sentiment is being echoed across the country as they continue to try and destroy the current Administration. The Democrats continuing to push hard for identity politics is going to continue to diminish support. Look at their visual in the message last night in the Response to the Presidential address to Congress. What image does a bunch of elder white people from the South, all sitting with stern faces, project? Racial harmony sure didn't come to mind. (these shots are well planned, not impromptu)

    The job of the minority party in Government is not to undermine the majority, it is to keep their side relevant in law making and conversation.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Help them leave by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Any person in any agency that refuses to support the current administration should absolutely leave, and do so in a hurry.

      Those people are hired to serve their country foremost, not their president.

      Taking a crap on administration was never before seen as okay, yet that is what the current leaks are designed to do.

      We The People must distance ourselves from Trump if we are to retain any credibility.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > We The People must distance ourselves from Trump if we are to retain any credibility.

      We The People fucking *picked* Trump. Support the things he does that you like, bitch about the things he does that you don't like. But you won't do that. You'll burn down as much as you can because you didn't get your president in, or your senate, or your house. You'll fuck over the poor, you'll fuck over the future. You poor deluded fuck.

    3. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 1

      The behavior of the Democratic party for the last several months has pushed every single one of them away. The current behavior has turned them into enemies of the Democratic party. That sentiment is being echoed across the country as they continue to try and destroy the current Administration.

      Honest question: what behavior are you talking about? Many, many democrats have stated that they are willing to work with the new administration on areas of common ground. Many democrats have voted in favor of Trump's cabinet appointments.

      So far, they've been positively cooperative compared to the obstructionist tactics of the Republicans during the Obama administration. Sure, Democrats have criticized Trump on his unconstitutional or poorly conceived orders and statements (as have Republicans) - why is that a problem?

    4. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Undermining _ANY_ branch of Government is a DIS-service to their Country.

      Clearly not true, in fact the three branches of government are set up in just such an adversarial structure: for the express purpose of undermining each other. A citizen inhibiting a branch out of ideological purposes is a weapon of great power for the people. There are multiple examples of this throughout history, I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to find them.

    5. Re:Help them leave by meta-monkey · · Score: 1, Informative

      Honest question: what behavior are you talking about?

      Filibustering Trump's cabinet? It's taking forever, for no other reason that Democrats dragging their feet. Republicans did not do this to Obama's cabinet, and approved 7 of his appointments on Obama's first day in office.

      I'm not arguing Republicans didn't use obstructionist tactics later in Obama's presidency, but I don't see how you can say Democrats aren't being obstructionists now when they've filibustered cabinet appointments. It ultimately doesn't matter because they have no power and can't actually stop anything. They're merely delaying the inevitable.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    6. Re: Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the electoral college picked trump. The majority of we the people elected clinton. Get your facts straight. Or was that an "alternative fact?"

    7. Re: Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa, there! You forgot to mention Russia and Comey.

    8. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that the Republicans control the Senate, right? Meaning it's the Republicans who are in charge of scheduling the hearings on Trump's nominees, which is what really delays the nominations. And even in the hearings, the Republicans, being the majority, are in charge. And it's the Republicans delaying hearings & votes on the nominees because some of the nominees are senators themselves (all Republican) and the Republicans don't want to confirm those senators too quickly because that would then change the mix of the senate including the hearing committees.

      I'm not saying the Democrats wouldn't do the same thing were they the majority. But they're not so in this case the blame falls on the Republicans.

    9. Re:Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You are confusing undermining with something else. There is a well defined legal process for Government agencies to use to maintain balance and Law. In fact we obtained President Trump exactly due to the legal processes in place. Let us see if that person fits into your narrative, or if you are a shill.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    10. Re:Help them leave by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand the debate procedures in the senate. The Dems are spending as much time talking as allowed so they can delay each vote.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    11. Re:Help them leave by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You'll fuck over the poor, you'll fuck over the future. You poor deluded fuck.

      Wow, you're really the deluded one here. In case you haven't noticed, Trump and the GOP are working very hard to fuck over the poor, such as by repealing the Medicaid expansion and by repealing Obamacare without replacing it with anything that actually works for lower-income people. Then they want to lower taxes for ultra-rich people. You talk about "fucking over the poor", while simultaneously defending the people who have that as their explicit party platform. Sad.

    12. Re:Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 2

      Honest question: what behavior are you talking about? Many, many democrats have stated that they are willing to work with the new administration on areas of common ground. Many democrats have voted in favor of Trump's cabinet appointments.

      Lets start with the declarations of impeachment that began back in November. How about the constant claims of racism, discrimination, islamaphobic, homophobic, xenophobic, and that anyone that does agree with their Leftism is one or all of those things.

      How about the claims that illegal immigrants are not, and can not be, criminals and that the American people must not only welcome criminals but transfer wealth to them. In addition of course to any other group that the Democrats wish to import for political gain. How about the false claim that the moratorium on immigration was a "Muslim" ban, that controlling immigration and borders is anti-American and racist. How about them fighting against changes to the ACA even while the ACA has harmed far more Americans than it helped, with premiums up so far that middle class people can't pay, and deductibles going from on average 500/1000 to 5000/10000 for citizens.

      What we are seeing is well beyond the normal hyperbole and exaggeration, it is outright lies and propaganda coming from the Democratic party. Having Perez and Ellison elected as the party leaders should be the icing on the cake, with both being vocal detractors of the US and the latter advocating violence, antisemitism, and Muslim extremism.

      If your argument is that there are some sane people left in the Democratic party I'll give you that, but point out that they have no voice in the Democratic party. The Democratic party has become the party of identity politics.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    13. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 1

      The Democrats have voted in favor of many appointments, but it's pretty clear thanks to the issues with Flynn that extended questioning is warranted - Trump has been appointing people with dubious backgrounds, lackluster credentials, potential conflicts of interest, foreign ties, and extreme ideologies. In those cases, it's appropriate for Democrats and Republicans to scrutinize and possibly reject his appointments. But in the case when he appoints someone who is actually qualified (General Mattis, for instance) then there isn't any great difficulty getting the job done.

    14. Re:Help them leave by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      But you know they're all going to pass anyway, right? The Dems aren't persuading anyone, they're just filling up time.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    15. Re:Help them leave by epine · · Score: 1

      Any person in any agency that refuses to support the current administration should absolutely leave, and do so in a hurry.

      All I Really Need to Know I Learned from Jerry Maguire.

      What can I say? At least Jerry Maguire beats kindergarten.

    16. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing undermining with something else.

      Whether or not there is a well defined legal process, the power lies in the people. You can argue all you want that that Legal structure makes 'undermining' activities something other than undermining, and you will probably call it checks and balances. But the fact of the matter is that the branches undermine each other at every turn.

      The people can undermine the will of the Judicial, Executive, and Legislative through the use of Jury Nullification, as well as the use of their individual power as employees of the Government.

      I think that Snowden did a great service to the Country when he undermined the power of the executive, and I am sure that there are others who agree. Following the 'Legal' process is sometimes the least effective measure to limit the power of a tyranny.

      The legal structure surrounding the system fails at times and different tactics can be employed. Note Hamiltons use of 'prudence' in the following quote:

      "If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify. — Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 33"

      I will not fall into your shill trap: My narrative stands on its own.

    17. Re:Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Whether or not there is a well defined legal process, the power lies in the people.

      You missed the most important part of that statement, which should be "within the law". Revolutionaries are rightly considered treasonous, whether or not you believe in their cause.

      I think that Snowden did a great service to the Country when he undermined the power of the executive, and I am sure that there are others who agree.

      People agreed with Snowden because he attempted to use the proper system and found no results. His act of turning the information over to the public was a matter of last resort, not first resort. Manning on the other hand receives no such accolades because they did not attempt the right way at all.

      Following the 'Legal' process is sometimes the least effective measure to limit the power of a tyranny.

      Failure to follow laws is a much faster way to tyranny, hence why we have a Constitution and Laws.

      "If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify. — Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 33"

      Which tyrannical use of power are you attempting to claim happened? One approved by members of both houses, the executive branch, and reviewed by the judicial branch? I won't hold my breath for examples, which from leftists tend to be thought crimes and not actual events. Hell, you could surprise me.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    18. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Revolutionaries are not considered treasonous ... if their side wins. To the overthrown Gub'mnt ... BANG yo' dead !

    19. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 1

      Lets start with the declarations of impeachment that began back in November. How about the constant claims of racism, discrimination, islamaphobic, homophobic, xenophobic, and that anyone that does agree with their Leftism is one or all of those things.

      To be fair, Trump's conflicts of interest, quantity of lawsuits, and anti-constitutional goals are all hugely concerning to anybody, or at least ought to be. Bill Clinton was vilified (and eventually impeached) for sexual behavior that doesn't even make the top 10 list for Trump's antics.

      How about the claims that illegal immigrants are not, and can not be, criminals and that the American people must not only welcome criminals but transfer wealth to them.

      Citation needed. I have never seen a claim that illegal immigrants can not be criminals. And Democrats haven't changed policy in the last several months over the period of time that their behavior is "driving people away". Their immigration policy is essentially similar to what it's been for the last decade.

      How about the false claim that the moratorium on immigration was a "Muslim" ban

      What was the basis of the ban then? Trump and his administration have explicitly stated that they prefer to help Christians. No refugees or immigrants from these countries have killed Americans with terrorist acts... the same cannot be said for many other countries that were not on the ban. Trump stated on the campaign trail that he wanted to ban Muslims from immigrating. The onus is on you to show that this ban had a basis in anything beyond religious discrimination.

      How about them fighting against changes to the ACA even while the ACA has harmed far more Americans than it helped, with premiums up so far that middle class people can't pay, and deductibles going from on average 500/1000 to 5000/10000 for citizens.

      Citation needed. The rate of increase in insurance premiums has not been substantially changed by the ACA, upwards OR downwards. It has, however, had a massive impact on uninsured numbers. And note: Trump himself has backpedaled on plans to repeal the ACA. Democrats have generally been willing to accept improvements to the law but are opposed to attempts to repeal. Compare that to Republicans, who were unwilling to work with Obama to improve the ACA because it might have made him look good.

      The Democratic party has become the party of identity politics.

      I don't think the Democrats are perfect, and I think this is a reasonable criticism. The way to fix their issue (and most of the problems they really care about) is with a populist economic platform focused directly at the middle and lower class, which is what got Bernie so far in the primaries. And ultimately, that's what got Trump elected. Again though, nothing new here - that's been their schtick for a while.

      Overall, it sounds like you've been watching a lot of Fox News and reading a lot of Brietbart. Find something centrist to read, examine everything critically (especially the news that you WANT to agree with, which is when it is easiest to be deceived) and you will have a much clearer picture of our situation. The Democrats are being relatively cooperative, all things considered. Mitch McConnell was very explicit about his intent to oppose Obama in all things, whether they were good for the country or not, just to make sure he was seen as a failure. Democrats have said nothing of the sort.

    20. Re:Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I know which sides hold the guns, and the Leftist in the country have been more than happy to give theirs up.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    21. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 2

      They don't hold a candle to the obstructionism of the right:

      John Boehner offering his plans for Obama’s agenda: “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”

      Mitch McConnell: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

      If that's not putting political aims above the good of the country, I don't know what is.

    22. Re:Help them leave by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Part 1, pure hyperbole and Bullshit. If there is illegal activity due process will find it and prosecute it, and the Constitution provides the presumption of innocence. Leftists wanted that for their candidate.

      Part 2. You can run a Google search and find Nancy Pelosi telling a women that illegal aliens are not criminals. Woman: “In 2010 one of the illegals slaughtered my son,” she began. “He tortured him, he beat him, he tied him up like an animal. And he set him on fire. And I am not a one-story mother. This happens every day because there are no laws enforced at the border.” Pelosi: "I pray for you, again, we all pray that none of us has to experience what you’ve experienced. So thank you for channeling your energy to help prevent something like that from happening, but I do want to say to you, that in our sanctuary cities, our people are not disobeying the law. These are law-abiding citizens. It enables them to there without being reported to ICE in case of another crime that they might bare witness to."

      Part 3 - The basis of the ban is that the 7 States under moritorium are either failed states, or openly support terrorism. The US does not employ Santa Claus to determine a person's status, it relies on foreign governments to provide status. If there is no central Government (Libya, Sudan, Syria), status can not be provided. Other Governments (Iran) can not be trusted to provide reliable information. Christians, including Yazidis , were mentioned as a priority since ISIS has been openly committing genocide against those groups.

      Part 4, and I'm done doing research for you can be found here as well as numerous other sources.

      I don't care about your opinion of the Democratic party any more than you care about mine. I don't listen to Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC, or NBC, or anyone else to form my opinion. ALL media in this country has become so biased the truth is hard to find. I go to sources, and suggest you do the same. I can say absolutely that my opinion is based in facts, and constantly being updated with evaluations. Not many, including you it seems, can say the same (referencing your lack of desire or ability to find information on immigration, Pelosi's statement, etc..).

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    23. Re:Help them leave by meta-monkey · · Score: 0

      Yes, the Republicans were obstructionist. The Dems are currently being obstructionist. We're agreed on both these points, right?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    24. Re:Help them leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, not for sexual misconduct--something that isn't a crime.

      If you can't even get a fact like that straight, I don't know how you can possibly expect anyone to take you seriously. The fact that people all the way up and down the chain of command in your party are acting like this is the reason it is collapsing. The Dems refuse to be politicians and actually listen to the complaints of the people, and show themselves to be slavering savages who want nothing but power, and as a result, will lose their status as a major party, and maybe wind up with a lot of their top people in jail, or even executed for treason, sedition, and even straight up murder (ie they killed Seth Rich in an attempt to stop leaks from the DNC, who knows how many others).

      If you guys don't get your act together, you will be giving the country to the Republicans for the next 40 years before a new party can become nationally competitive, or until you can recover from this absolutely epic clusterfuck.

    25. Re:Help them leave by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 0

      Replace the term "Country" with "Trump" everywhere it appears. They aren't destroying the country by leaking, they are affecting the POTUS -- in no way are those the same thing.

      Now, if they think that the POTUS is a huge security risk, they might actually be acting on conscience rather than just "having a beef" with the administration.

      The current behavior has turned them into enemies of the Democratic party.

      Do you feel the same about the Tea Party? I'm not a fan of them, but I admire their conviction and willingness to stand up and be heard.

      What I like here, is that Democrats are finally realizing that they are liberals and that they have to fight for their principles. Maybe people are shocked and expect Democrats to sit back and sip tea and crumpets, rather than getting dirty in the trenches.

      Leaks at the NSA might not be lawful, but not everything right is legal. The POTUS seems to have no problem pushing the envelope -- but we have Jeff Sessions to make sure he behaves.

      Nothing is going to happen to Trump, because the Republicans have the power but lack the ethics. It doesn't matter what is leaked and foreign adversaries can just buy all our sensitive data from contractors (as was exposed on Wikileaks). So you needn't worry.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    26. Re:Help them leave by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I know which sides hold the guns, and the Leftist in the country have been more than happy to give theirs up.

      Nope. Those people are centrist. There's nothing liberal about giving up your guns, and we haven't done. Gun ownership in my family goes back well before registration requirements...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re:Help them leave by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      We The People must distance ourselves from Trump if we are to retain any credibility.

      Hopefully the democrats in congress make this same stand!

    28. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 1

      Yes, the Republicans were obstructionist. The Dems are currently being obstructionist. We're agreed on both these points, right?

      I certainly think both sides are willing to dig their heels in and seek to spin every new event in the way that is most favorable for them. That said, I think there's a big difference in degree.

    29. Re:Help them leave by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      The actual facts are that plenty of legislation was passed - with bipartisan support - during the Obama years. In fact, MORE legislation was passed AFTER the super majority expired in 2010 than the Democrats were able to pass when they had a majority.

      The problem is that the media thrives on clickbait salacious sound bites, and most people are too lazy to study anything that takes more than five minutes of effort, so they go around spouting this kind of nonsense.

      If Donald Trump walked on water, the headline of HuffPo, ThinkProgress, etc would be TRUMP CAN'T SWIM and I am sure you would post that as fact.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    30. Re:Help them leave by werepants · · Score: 1

      Part 1, pure hyperbole and Bullshit. If there is illegal activity due process will find it and prosecute it, and the Constitution provides the presumption of innocence. Leftists wanted that for their candidate.

      Ok... so how is a desire to shut down the free press and a pattern of overt religious discrimination at all compatible with the first amendment? All you have to do is listen to Trump himself to see that he's outright hostile to many provisions of the Bill of Rights. By supporting Trump, the right has lost whatever credibility they once had with regard to being the party that respected the constitution. Under his leadership they are fast becoming authoritarians rather than conservatives.

      Your Pelosi quote doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. No democrat has ever said that illegal immigrants cannot commit crimes. It's also frankly ludicrous to see this narrative that immigrants are somehow more crime-prone than any other citizen. The actual data suggests the opposite. Sure, there are serial killers that are immigrants. There are also serial killers that are citizens. The tendency towards violent crime is completely orthogonal to immigrant status, and only fearmongers trying to push a nationalist agenda will tell you otherwise.

      Trump himself declared his intent for "a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on." It's a Muslim ban. Stop changing the facts. The whole thing is unconstitutional, and if you are going to claim this is ok, then you should just be honest that you want to abolish the first amendment protections of religion and make Christianity a state-sanctioned religion. That's reprehensible, but at least you'd be consistent then, rather than trying to pretend you give a shit about the constitution while simultaneously defending flagrant abuses by DJT.

      Look at the facts on the ACA - it hasn't had a meaningful impact one way or the other on healthcare costs, but it has had a meaningful impact on uninsured numbers. Get away from anecdotes and partisan opinion pieces, look at data, and that's the only conclusion that can be made. It isn't the raging success that Democrats would like to take credit for, but it isn't the sole cause of our problems as Fox News has been claiming for the last several years. Many Republicans actually support the provision that allows coverage for those with pre-existing conditions, and some of the law's other aspects. Sure, health care costs are increasing, but who is at fault for that? Those who are refusing to do anything. Look at the numbers since 1960 and you'll see that our recent problem are just the culmination of a trend that's been building for a long, long time: http://hspm.sph.sc.edu/courses...

      Healthcare is the single biggest economic issue facing the country right now. Wages generally grow linearly, at least on the scale of human lifetimes, but it's plain as day from that chart that healthcare costs are growing quadratically. This is a real, systemic problem, not just another political football, and people's lives and livelihoods are at stake.

      The Democrats are in the minority. They literally have control over no branch of the government right now, so I'm not sure why it's even worth complaining about them. Instead, you should be looking to these Republicans who are so full of promises to actually follow through because they hold all the cards - but they've been playing opposition politics for so long that I'm doubtful that they will get anything meaningful done to address our real problems. I would love to be proven wrong.

  29. abuse of resources by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

    Retaining and recruiting talented technical personnel has become a top national security priority in recent years as Russia, China, Iran and other nation states and criminal groups have sharpened their cyber offensive abilities while the NSA wasted their resources on attacking their own civilians.

    There, fixed that for you.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  30. Good by DakotaSmith · · Score: 1

    Those of us in IT know firsthand just precisely how evil the NSA has become.

    All the NSA cages in various data centers, anyone? Enough estimated storage in Utah to store all the information of note on every single human being on the planet , anyone?

    The NSA, CIA, FBI, and anything else filled with those who spy on Americans should be immediately and permanently disbanded; and any employees barred from any form of Government work, nor working for any company with Government contracts. Also, round up anyone you can prove spied on Americans and try them for treason.

    Finally, the NSA Utah data center should be evacuated and then nuked. A Constitutional Amendment should then be ratified that specifies the site should be nuked every 100 years at the nation's Centennials -- as a radioactive warning to all future generations of what a free society never builds.

    --
    Microsoft leads to Bluescreen; Bluescreen leads to downtime; downtime leads to suffering.
    1. Re:Good by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      the NSA Utah data center should be evacuated and then nuked. A Constitutional Amendment should then be ratified that specifies the site should be nuked every 100 years at the nation's Centennials -- as a radioactive warning to all future generations of what a free society never builds.

      No nukes is good nukes. Besides, I'd rather give that hardware to the Internet Archive. Also, you really don't want to see what happens if we actually eliminate all those TLAs. Cutting them back severely might be a good thing, though. All laws and all jobs should come up for periodic review.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Start with google.

    3. Re:Good by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      What's your really scary scenario? Our TLAs create/train more criminals than they catch, and from the very beginning, they have undermined democracy.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  31. Seems like improvement... by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    acrimonious relationship between the intelligence community and President Donald Trump

    Yeah, stop leaking the White House staff's communications to press, you "Deep Throat" wannabes...

    said he was stunned by the caliber of the would-be recruits [applying for private sector jobs -mi]

    This part, actually, sounds great — consumer's technology gets a chance to improve beyond the government's ability to spy on us.

    And not just American Government's — by far the most benign of the three — that of Russia and China as well.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Seems like improvement... by vinlud · · Score: 1

      You want companies to be able to outperform governments? Holy crap, from bad to worse

      --
      Repeat after me: We are all individuals
    2. Re:Seems like improvement... by mi · · Score: 1

      You want companies to be able to outperform governments?

      For a certain meaning of "outperform". Of course. And they already do that in most markets — including, gasp, weapons. If one can already buy a very good firearm and/or body-armor — better than what the government is using — why should encryption be different?

      Oh, the government is welcome — just as it is with other weapons — to buy the same technology as well...

      Holy crap, from bad to worse

      You aren't explaining, but I smell Statism... Is that what ails you? The conviction, that only the government is ultimately able to provide for citizens' real needs — and to determine, which needs are real?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    3. Re:Seems like improvement... by vinlud · · Score: 1

      Really no idea where you are getting that last part from but the fundamental difference between a government and a corporation is that the former is setup (usually) to serve its people and is held accountable by them, while the latter is setup to serve itself and its shareholders. That doesn't mean at all corporations are inherently evil, not at all (not a zero sum game), but there is a fundamental difference. Whether your local implementation of this is well functioning and desirable is a different story.

      This system only works as long as the government can oversee and control the behaviour of corporations. The production of weapons by a company is not a problem because the gov has a standing army capable of taking that corporation out completely. With encryption a similar balance applies to function optimally, and a government having a braindrain and becoming incapable of properly overseeing related aspects like elections, security systems or nuceal launch codes can become a huge liability.

      --
      Repeat after me: We are all individuals
    4. Re:Seems like improvement... by mi · · Score: 1

      a government having a braindrain and becoming incapable of properly overseeing related aspects like elections, security systems or nuceal launch codes can become a huge liability.

      I'm more worried about officials of the government — which is already a monopoly, by its very definition and function — turning those things into private cash-cows and sources of other undue influence, than I am about a corporation doing same.

      The latter has already happened — numerous times in different countries, including the US. The former — not so much. And, even if/when it does happen, that standing army you mentioned will still be there to take over the miscreants.

      Supposedly, NSA created a special Blackberry for President Obama — but they would not make one even for the Secretary of State. Today, aghast at the choice made the country's voters — the "little people", who "don't know any better" — the security apparatus are leaking embarrassing details about Trump's team. What hope do you and I have of prevailing against such organizations, if the POTUS is struggling against their sabotage?

      With the braindrain you fear and lament, maybe, you and I and, indeed, anyone in the world will be able to buy a smartphone as secure as the President's. Secure not only against the US government's unwarranted searches, but against those of the really oppressive regimes. And the government's spies will be able to use the same off-the-shelf tech for their purposes...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    5. Re:Seems like improvement... by mi · · Score: 1

      The latter has already happened

      Crap, of course, I meant the former... Really ought to re-read the entire post before submitting — spoiled by other forums, where it is possible to edit after submission...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  32. Sounds like great news. by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1, Insightful

    More open positions for non-SJW CS, math and Cyber security professionals.

    --
    5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
  33. Reduces the need for H1Bs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all the smart guys at NSA (which when I worked there were not the bulk of people) go to private industry, they'll have less excuse to say they can't find talent.
    Which of course needs a /sarc tag - because they always could find talent, just not talent willing to work for slave wages under slave conditions.

    .

    NSA has a dual role (on paper) but it's REAL hard to find any actual defense of US security by them - it's obvious they hoard 0-day attacks for their own use.
    They could be making us safer (from each other as well as foreign adversaries) but nope.

    .

    AC because you know why.

  34. Morale problems, eh? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I feel SO SORRY that the professional constitutional and human rights violators aren't feeling all that chipper about their work.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  35. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by El+Cubano · · Score: 1

    Did I miss some sarcasm in that post? Or are you serious?

    If you are serious, then you clearly are not reading the news. There is no effective oversight of the intelligence community by Congress. Just look at what happened with the CIA torture report, or Clapper lying to Congress and suffering no consequences for his lies. Read or listen carefully to what Senator Wyden is saying about the intelligence community: if he expresses concern that something may be happening, then it is.

    First, I specifically said the following, right after where you cut off my quote: Are there abuses? Definitely, just like with anything else. However, they are about as common as instances of actual voter fraud.

    Second, I have said this before and I will say this again: the government (at all levels, from local to federal, including military, policy, intelligence, etc.) is a representation of the society from which it is drawn. To think that intelligence (or military, or police for that matter) harbors nothing but miscreants and malcontents who wish to flout the law for their own personal gain and pleasure is an insult not just to them, but to every American.

    Now, with that out of the way, the intelligence community is huge. The overwhelming majority of people who work in the intelligence community are good stand up people who respect the law and want to do a good job. Just like with police. Do we see instances of people abusing their power? Yes, it happens with police and it happens with the intelligence community as well. However, every time that people point to a single incidence or something like that and then use it to characterize the entire community of intelligence or law enforcement, all it does is make those people feel like they are being attacked. That is not actually a good thing. If you think it is, go talk to the people in neighborhoods that the police now avoid because they feel like they don't have the support of the community. Ask them if they think it is a good thing.

    Absolutely, if something is being done against the law, the perpetrators need to be dealt with. In fact, when you look at law enforcement and intelligence, the special power which they have over their fellow citizens means that any violation should be dealt with very harshly. That serves to both underscore the extreme gravity of the positions of trust they discharge and to discourage others from going astray.

    So, please do everyone a favor and help deal with the specific problems as they are identified. Please don't look at one incident and translate that into "they're all criminals."

  36. You utter fool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another Putin faboi

    If the only intelligence agencies you want are the ones who do no wrong, ever, you will have intelligence agencies with as much intelligence as you ... none, whatsoever.

    1. Re:You utter fool by hey! · · Score: 1

      That can't be the best you've got. Please try again.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  37. Re: This happens with every change in administrati by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Question is, can Congress actually keep the intelligence community accountable when said IC has each representative's personal call history, text history, email history, and browser history? Information is power and the IC has a monopoly on that. I can't prove they're blackmailing the whole of Congress but it does make me wonder who is doing who's bidding?

  38. As a member by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

    and worries about the acrimonious relationship between the intelligence community and President Donald Trump

    As a member of the intelligents community, I feel the same way!

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
  39. Drain the swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what "draining the swamp" looks like.

    If they are crooked in government and see the writing on the wall, they will leave while attempting as much damage as they can. From my perspective, those leaking and leaving are OBVIOUSLY part of the corrupt swamp.

    You telling us breaking Federal law is ok as long as it hurts Trump, shows that you too are part of the swamp that needs to be drained. Congratulations on bragging about how you support breaking the law and government corruption. Let me guess, you voted Hillary and hoped the corruption would have continued.

    1. Re:Drain the swamp by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      NO! The TV told me "draining the swamp" was about getting rich guys out of the government and not getting rid of all the corrupt globalist scumbags that are shitting up our governmental apparatus. The TV then scoffed as Trump put more of the same kinds of assholes in charge and never mention that the small-fry scumbags that enable the shitty policies of past governments are the ones who really need to go.

      That NSA friend someone mentioned above is part of that swamp. Good riddance. The sooner we purge the Neo-con cancer from state institutions the better.

  40. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Whorhay · · Score: 1

    I can agree with the not branding entire groups of people because of the actions of a few. That said voter fraud would appear to be far less common and less significant than abuses within the intelligence community. Not everyone in those organizations is going to be authoritarians, but they will be much more common simply because of the way recruiting and promotion works.

    There was a time, not even a decade ago when I would have been happy to work for any number of federal agencies. These days though I find that I've got a list of acceptable employers and it seems to get smaller and smaller all the time.

  41. He the orange straw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NSA's job it to spy on Russian spies who are in contact with Russian Intelligence, that's people like Manafort, Cohen, Flynn, Tillerson, Ross...
    So their job is to protect America from a bunch of spies working for a foreign power.

    Trump's appointees have ALL extensive, unexplainable links to Russian intelligence. Ross is so bad, he was the bank man for most of Russia's spy operations in Europe. He is likely also financially linked to Trump and Putin directly.

    And now they're supposed to work for Russia against the majority wishes of Americans? Of course they're leaving in droves. He's the straw that breaks the camels back.

    1. Re:He the orange straw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Trump's appointees have ALL extensive, unexplainable links to Russian intelligence.

      Citation fucking needed

  42. I've interviewed some NSA people lately. . . by Salgak1 · · Score: 2

    . . .and they've uniformly complained about the glacial pace of promotions there (and the senior people are camping in their positions as long as they can), the tendency of No Such Agency to pigeonhole them in their niches. . . . and the fact that the pay is crap, even for contractors.

    However, couldn't hire any of them, they also were demanding Silicon Valley Rockstar salaries for Federal Contract positions in DC Metro . . .

    1. Re:I've interviewed some NSA people lately. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cost of living is fairly close... I had to demand the same and get turned down. Guess you have to settle for the second and third tier candidates.

  43. Re:Would you work for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "muh Putin!"

    This is literally your entire post, and probably your next 8 years of posts.

  44. Screw 'em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let the National Snowflake Agency clowns go see what their talents are worth in the private sector.

  45. It is just time for talents to by Max_W · · Score: 1

    go home.

  46. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by quantaman · · Score: 1

    The "same" thing happened when Obama was elected. Bush had significantly expanded many intelligence programs and there lots of folks in the intelligence community who feared that Obama's campaign focus on closing Guantanamo and pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan along with his focus on transparency and civil liberties meant that he would gut the entire community and all of its big programs.

    They were wrong. It wasn't long before morale rebounded when people figured out Obama wasn't going to drastically shake things up.

    That was partly them misunderstanding Obama, he's a pragmatic realist, he really believes in civil liberties and pulling out of wars, but he's also understands the current system evolved for a reason and is/was extremely cautious about breaking it.

    But that was also just worries about downsizing, they didn't find Obama morally objectionable, they just thought they might lose their jobs.

    Now, I think Trump, given his personality and what he has done so far, is more likely to shake things up then Obama was, but in the end this will end up being something that we point to the next time the administration changes and there is a story about people in the intelligence community fearing changes suffer a morale slump and start thinking about leaving.

    Heck, the intelligence community loses way more people to the private sector because of things like "I can keep my phone with me at my desk," "I can talk about my work in public", and "I don't have to deal with the insanity that is government bureaucracy" way more than "the president might ask me to do something I find objectionable."

    I think Trump really is fundamentally different. He doesn't seem to respect a lot of the informal rules that keep democracies democratic, and he seems quite happy with hostile foreign intelligence agencies attacking the US as long as they're attacking his enemies. There's even allegations that he's actually been under the direct influence of Russia intelligence operatives, it's not proven, but the fact that the allegations aren't insane is very disturbing.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  47. You are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why comment when you obviously don't know what you are talking about?

    John Podesta's emails were leaked due to a phising attack... maybe. We still haven't seen proof that was how they were gotten, but it does look likely. His password was 'password', so anyone going after his emails got them phishing attack or not.

    DNC emails were not hacked, or at least not a shread of evidence has been given to show they have been. WikiLeaks claims they were handed to them. It sounds like an insider got the emails and handed them over, because it was more than 1 account the entire server got compromised (different than Podesta). It could have been hacked, it could have been an inside job, but the evidence released from the government to date you can't make either claim.

    Even if the DNC did have 2 factor authentication, if it was an inside job like I suspect it was, they would have still been leaked. If they didn't want them leaked by an insider, they should be doing illegal things that might cause a Sanders supporter to be upset.

  48. trump has nothing to do with this by thomas.moses · · Score: 1

    Wow Trump effect is just magical in 2 months - NOT !! Grow up people this is all about $$ and promotions They cannot pay the salaries that private sector can provide for doing the same work. There is no promotion process in place for good tech employees, you get lumped in with the same pool as everyone else for promotions. For all the morality people, try to find some day about how much information Google and Facebook have on you and your personal movements, and then talk about the "evilness" of a surveillance state coming out of silicon valley.

    1. Re:trump has nothing to do with this by Tempest451 · · Score: 1

      Most government employees make less than their commercial counterparts, but what makes government service attractive is the job security. With Trump threatening to slash budgets, people see reductions in force actions happening more often. If job security isn't there, why not go to the private sector?

    2. Re:trump has nothing to do with this by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      You need to experience both environments. In my experience Government offices have little to no incentives to meet goals of any kind, whereas in the corporate world - unless you're working for a company that has been around forever and is completely secure - people are managed by objectives (MBO) and are expected to produce results. In every government office I have ever worked with, for every ten people one does 95% of the work and the other nine are slugs/slackers.

      Government employees do not make less. They make far more, and they have incredible benefit and pension plans. And thanks to FDR, they pay money to the SEIU, who in turn gives it to Democrat politicians, in the biggest money laundering / theft scheme ever engineered in human history.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
  49. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Jiro · · Score: 1

    Please don't look at one incident and translate that into "they're all criminals."

    It's not that the incidents directly mean they're all criminals. It's that the incidents show that checks and balances don't exist or are not working. If you don't have working checks and balances, that's an environment which criminals are going to take advantage of.

  50. Seriously, who would work there? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

    You know your top level boss will throw you under the boss for his foreign controller.

    America has no idea how many have died because of such top level outings.

    Died.

    Not lost jobs.

    Died.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  51. Is this news? by Zemran · · Score: 1

    Reuters are supposed to be a news channel but this piece seems to be an opinion. There is a lot of talk about fake news but opinion disguised as news is fake.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  52. BUHU! No more spying an Joe Awerage.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You would think its would be a good thing if a spy organization fears for their budget.

  53. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    I see one major difference between Obama and Trump. While many in the intelligence agencies feared that Obama would scale back their programs due to a change in the focus of his administration, Obama never denigrated the intelligence community--I'm sorry the "so-called" intelligence community. For their fears about Obama it was a fear about the change in priorities. For Trump it is a President who has openly mocked their importance and jobs to the country and the world.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  54. Exactly what Putin wanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His investment is really paying off

  55. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please take the government job at NSA where you can do less damage than if we accidentally hired someone like you at my company where we require intelligent people to use hard facts to make real decisions. Getting the wrong answers based on your personal feelings will lead to potentially thousands of people,losing their only means of supporting their family.

    In contrast, if you're a government screwup who allows his personal feelings to impact his job performance then no one really cares because the government doesn't produce anything.

  56. The God Emperor Fears Nothing! by newdsfornerds · · Score: 1

    Hail Kek!

    --
    Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
  57. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    In addition to that, if Trump gets the defense budget increases he is seeking, that will translate directly into increased funding for the intelligence community, which will likely improve morale overall.

    No it won't. You're somehow assuming that increased defense spending will somehow equate to higher salaries, which is simply preposterous. Increased spending just means more mandates to do more stuff: build more ships, more weapons, etc. That doesn't mean that individual salaries will actually go up, in fact likely the opposite, because Trump is really big on decreasing Federal spending and "doing more with less". So sure, maybe the intelligence community will get more funding, but that comes with the provision that they hire more people and do more stuff. The actual workers will still be held to the same Federal worker pay schedules, and most likely the cost-of-living increases will be cut to keep spending low.

  58. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    However, every time that people point to a single incidence or something like that and then use it to characterize the entire community of intelligence or law enforcement, all it does is make those people feel like they are being attacked.

    Every time cops do something wrong, all the other cops, and the prosecutors and judges, stand behind them even when it's as blatant as shooting unarmed people in the back.

    These people *should* be attacked.

    That is not actually a good thing. If you think it is, go talk to the people in neighborhoods that the police now avoid because they feel like they don't have the support of the community. Ask them if they think it is a good thing.

    Why should I care about what a bunch of thugs and murderers think is a good thing? If they weren't such abusive assholes, then maybe they'd have more community support. They've earned their reputation fairly.

    Second, I have said this before and I will say this again: the government (at all levels, from local to federal, including military, policy, intelligence, etc.) is a representation of the society from which it is drawn.

    Now this is exactly correct. The problem is, our society is not homogeneous. So the police are not drawn from across society; they're drawn from one part of society that loves authoritarianism and approves of brutality and murder of anyone who doesn't meekly obey their racist authority. But there is a significant part of society which does back up the police, including authoritarians like you, which is why they stay in power.

    Absolutely, if something is being done against the law, the perpetrators need to be dealt with

    Except when it's done by the police, right? Because that's the way it's been up until everyone and their brother had portable video recorders in their pockets to document their abuses.

    In fact, when you look at law enforcement and intelligence, the special power which they have over their fellow citizens means that any violation should be dealt with very harshly.

    Sounds great; an authoritarian giving lip service to doing the right thing. Problem is, it doesn't work out that way in practice; people like you will always side with the cops no matter how blatant their abuse.

  59. Forgiveness Has a Requirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The transgressor must state clearly what they did, and they know it was wrong. They also need to state clearly that they are not going to transgress again, and how they intend to do that.

    Once the transgressor has done that then it's over to the victim, who may or may not forgive them. At the victim's sole and exclusive option!

    The Three Letter Agencies are, based upon their actions, not interested in confessing, do not think they did anything wrong, and anyone who thinks otherwise, is (misguided/a hippie/traitor/terrorist/criminal/juvenile). Or maybe they are afraid of any real accountability and exposure so they are hiding behind "National Security". After all, there was the whole CIA Dirty Tricks episode back in the 1960's, the whole FBI J. Edgar Hoover era where Hoover became a law unto himself, and so on.

    Bottom line, when the TLAs are held to account it usually results in a loss of authority, prestige, budget, headcount, and status. The TLAs don't like that, so they view airing of the dirty laundry as a process from which they can only lose.

  60. go easy, man by epine · · Score: 1

    Trump hasn't even hinted at anything like that yet your idiot NSA friend stuck it out through very real morale issues under Obama.

    Ah yes, from the "all morale issues are created equal" camp.

    Though I agree that there is a germ of truth here. From the military's perspective, there's no morale issue so great it can't be resolved by threatening an even worse outcome.

    Joyeux Noel to you too, and many Paths of Glory.

    Tell your shit stain friend his candidate lost and to grow some fucking balls and act like an adult. ... Or as my grandpa used to say ...

    Condolences about your grandpa. He was an ass, but the twelve crapper salute was worse than he deserved.

  61. PHB galore by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    He's the ultimate PHB, but the points come out the front.

  62. Re:This happens with every change in administratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody needs to trash trump... he's a living garbage pail kid ffs... he does that for us just fine.

    Leave off your man crush, fgs.

  63. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who gives up a Gub'mnt secured paycheck , health-care and assured pension ? NOBODY that's who .... so the poster spews snowflake drool thru his gumz.

  64. so, "moral outrage" from those lacking any morals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see if we can understand this:

    They were happy to work there under Obama's 8 years of blatantly violating the Constitution re US Citizens and while Obama was picking people out by name and ordering them droned to death while outside of war zones, even doing it to at least 1 US citizen who had Constitutional rights even while overseas. They were happy to work under Obama while he tapped the phones of American journalists and even filed papers to prosecute a Fox reporter he disliked as a terrorist supporter (a fake charge his administration later had to drop). They are still working while the intelligence agencies are leaking classified info (felony acts) at record reates to undermine the duly-elected civilian president (I know, "popular vote" and all that drivel... Trump won according to the Constitutional rules) thereby undermining the idea of civilian control and basic democratic principles.

    Any old day now, however, these snowflakes are going to get SO OUTRAGED that the new president has an orange complexion than they will QUIT!

    wow

    Please quit. This swamp might actually prove to be self-draining. The single best cleanup of the US government would be if unelected and un-accountable-to-the-public, smarmy, self-important, nameless, faceless, arrogant government employees who think they have some unique right to override the results of elections and try to blackmail elected leaders would be forever removed from government. Career civil servants are supposed to serve the American people by serving the officials the people have elected and following the Constitution, a very simple document, while NOT injecting their own beliefs into the matter. If civilian workers are free to undermine a President, then why shouldn't the military? A a coup by the civilian part of the government is not any better than a military coup but that's the path these snakes want to go down while pretending to have all sorts of moral superiority.

    If by being elected, Trump manages to cause the worst people in government to quit in faux moral outrage, then that swamp flushing alone will justify his election. The reality, however is that these are in all likelihood just a bunch of leftover Obamabots - were they anything else they would have quit over Obama's numerous evil actions.

  65. Re:Would you work for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dat delusion. Dat tinfoil.

    Jesus Christ, get it together.

  66. bunch of traitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bunch of traitors who were so concerned with whether or not they could, didn't stop to think if they should. They are threatening to become a state within a state. This is way you need humanties /history courses in enginnering programs, so they can understand the timeline how bad institutions develop