Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NSA's Top Talent is Leaving Because of Low Pay, Slumping Morale and Unpopular Reorganization (washingtonpost.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Ellen Nakashima and Aaron Gregg, reporting for the Washington Post: The National Security Agency is losing its top talent at a worrisome rate as highly skilled personnel, some disillusioned with the spy service's leadership and an unpopular reorganization, take higher-paying, more flexible jobs in the private sector (Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source). Since 2015, the NSA has lost several hundred hackers, engineers and data scientists, according to current and former U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter. The potential impact on national security is significant, they said. Headquartered at Fort Meade in Maryland, the NSA employs a civilian workforce of about 21,000 there and is the largest producer of intelligence among the nation's 17 spy agencies. The people who have left were responsible for collecting and analyzing the intelligence that goes into the president's daily briefing. Their work also included monitoring a broad array of subjects including the Islamic State, Russian and North Korean hackers, and analyzing the intentions of foreign governments, and they were responsible for protecting the classified networks that carry such sensitive information.

112 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarchy? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Gee, I can't imagine why people are losing their enthusiasm for working for the government. Unless, of course, they can see that it's counterproductive to the goal of freedom.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. What morale? by mnt · · Score: 1

    I could never see any morale in what the NSA does. Another case of a Pandoras box opened with grim consequences for everyone.

    Instead of a Information network contributing to human kind we now have a weapons platform that allows to kill without a trace.

    1. Re:What morale? by ledow · · Score: 1

      "moral" or "morale"?

      To be honest, I can't quite work how they find people clever enough to do that kind of thing properly, who are dumb enough to want to do it.

      "Protecting the nation" is all well and good but anyone with a brain should be able to tell that they go far, far beyond such a remit, into things that they really shouldn't.

      I think the same about GCHQ etc. and even Turing (kind of a hero to me). You can romanticise it, and say how many lives they save, but to me that's marred by the freedoms they impinge upon in doing so, the tools they create (and leave behind) that are capable of much less moral actions, etc.

      I'm probably not smart enough to work for such places, despite my education being in all kinds of related areas. But I'd have to refuse any kind of military service and/or spy work even if I was smart enough.

      When you meet a guy who goes into the army because he failed school, sure, that's a good option for him... job security, a decent amount of respect and professionalism, transferable skills. It makes sense. But when you meet someone who obviously has a brain and would have been successful even if they hadn't chosen to be a high-ranking officer, you have to wonder what their motivation is. I've never really got to the bottom of it because those people I've met like that are quite cagey and tend to hide behind some argument about "service to the country" and so on.

      I suppose the guys who invented the nuclear bomb would be no different. I just fail to see how you can get that far, be that deep-thinking, and not insert some sense of morality into your life.

      And, more importantly, how do they handle those who do then start to question what they're doing? Is it literally just threats to make things worse for them if they don't? It's something I could never reconcile with the people I generally meet - either they're smart and have a good handle on precisely why that kind of thing is something they want to steer well clear of, or they're not.

      Political colouration, etc. aside (which is really just pettiness... literally classing billions of people as "one of those two types of people"), how do intelligent people work in blind obedience to service to their nation?

    2. Re:What morale? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But when you meet someone who obviously has a brain and would have been successful even if they hadn't chosen to be a high-ranking officer, you have to wonder what their motivation is. I've never really got to the bottom of it because those people I've met like that are quite cagey and tend to hide behind some argument about "service to the country" and so on.

      That's a bit cynical and possibly says much about you. Certainly you cannot totally disbelieve that there are people who truly are motivated by a moral imperative to serve their country. I understand that you may not agree with their motivations, but why can't you at least believe their stated reason?

      One apropos example that has served as a sort of personal inspiration for my whole life is the case of the father of a friend of mine. The man was a successful surgeon, and an immigrant to the US. When I was in high school he resigned from private practice and joined the military as a surgeon with the stated purpose that he wanted to give back to the country that he was so proud to have joined. I'd hate to be the type of person who suspected some ulterior motive there.

      A word of advice for you, since you say you've "never really gotten to the bottom of it" when trying to understand these people: Maybe you should try listening to and accepting what they say are their reasons instead of assuming they are some cagey deceivers.

    3. Re:What morale? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Political colouration, etc. aside (which is really just pettiness... literally classing billions of people as "one of those two types of people"), how do intelligent people work in blind obedience to service to their nation?

      I think the answer is, they buy into the propaganda and the myth of what America is and stands for. They basically believe the reasons we are given for why we go to war. They think that while the US may occasionally behave badly at home or abroad, it is generally a good nation that tries to live up to its ideals.

      Personally, I agree with Gen. Butler's view that war is a racket, waged to make money for the corporations involved, extend American power and influence, and to make the world safe for American business. I would never work for the military or intelligence industries, because I do not share their perspectives and values. But for those who take the world at face value, and generally don't look too deeply into what is going on and why, it can be an attractive option.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    4. Re:What morale? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      As ex-military I will say that the "I love my country" guys were mostly in the military to do shit that is hard to do as a civilian. Mostly blowing stuff up, but the outright psychos just enjoyed treating others like shit. Some used it to rationalize their brainwashing. "Exactly why the fuck do I keep signing up?"
      Your surgeon friend would be a rare breed but was probably a good guy.

    5. Re:What morale? by Notabadguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "moral" or "morale"?

      When you meet a guy who goes into the army because he failed school, sure, that's a good option for him... job security, a decent amount of respect and professionalism, transferable skills. It makes sense. But when you meet someone who obviously has a brain and would have been successful even if they hadn't chosen to be a high-ranking officer, you have to wonder what their motivation is. I've never really got to the bottom of it because those people I've met like that are quite cagey and tend to hide behind some argument about "service to the country" and so on.

      You are the people fake news is written for. There is a world of information available to you, but you only want to hear what is slanted for you. I'll give it a shot since you haven't gotten to the bottom of it - the words will be wasted, but you've provoked my moral outrage.

      I enlisted in the US Army in 1998; among different scholarships I had a full four-year scholarship to Michigan State. I opted to join the army instead. I enlisted for the maximum enlistment (six years) because of my intent to make a lifetime in service to trying to make the world a better place - to do my part to see that kids didn't grow up like I did. I joined the infantry - 11B. My ASVAB scores were phenomenal - I could have done anything.

      I didn't join for guns, or for a uniform, or for failing school - I joined because I wanted to help - to be a part of something with a noble cause - protecting America, bringing peace to war torn parts of the world. Patriotism is a real thing. Young men committed suicide when they were denied entry to service during World War 2. This country's administration, its choices, and treatment of its citizens might not be worthy of such loyalty, but infantrymen enforce the last 300 meters of foreign policy; they don't make it.

      Two years into my enlistment, I was much...much more worldly. I was regretting having turned down college because I'd met so many retired infantry NCOs serving food in mess halls and defacs with the same story: "I've been infantry for 30 years, retired, and I don't have any useful life skills in the civilian world, so now I serve food." That's a terrifying future for a 20 year old. In theory, the military pays for 75% of the schooling costs for classes you take in service, but trying to go to college while being a soldier isn't very plausible. At least for an infantryman.

      Three of the officers in my company were West Point graduates (USMA). I was young, impressionable, and that's what I wanted to look like when I grew up. Officers could do more; help more - I wanted that. I wrote a letter to my senator, my congressman, the President - I went up my chain of command and got a letter of recommendation from my battalion commander; paired with the nomination of my Senator (and I had a powerful story to tell about overcoming adversity), I got into West Point.

      My army career ended up taking me into the world of Information Assurance - and here I'm going to get hazy - but I helped develop and test zero day exploits, develop cyber policy for the army - did some really interesting things. I still have my "I am the Fed" T-Shirt from one of the DefCons I went to when I got targeted in the "Spot the Fed" game. In the last decade, there's been lots of feds, so I don't know if they even play it anymore.

      I have a thousand stories of helping people - because its the right thing to do.

      Patriotism is real. It exists for people of all backgrounds and all educations. People make choices beyond their self interest - philanthropy is a word. If you truly discard that story and look for ulterior motive, its because you have self-imposed blinders and earplugs and refuse to hear or see anything you don't already believe - *YOU* have an ulterior motive.

    6. Re:What morale? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US nuclear effort was launched at a point that a psycho in charge of a huge war machine was conquoring the planet. Prior to the war, public records indicated that the Germans where well ahead along the research paths to build a nuclear bomb.

      The effort really was a matter of "oh crap, if this is possible, what if they get it first?" Because in a theoretical world where the Germans had nuclear weapons in WW2 while the allies are nowhere close, things get *bad*.

      Many of the people building the nuclear bomb in the manhatten project where not engaged in "blind obedience". They had their eyes open and they knew they where doing a horrible thing, but that is what war is: Horrible things, lest worse happen.

      You are young and stupid. That is ok. But sometimes you have to make hard choices, and "do no harm" doesn't work.

    7. Re:What morale? by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      they keep signing up because it's scary out in the real world to try to get a job

      Sure, some do. It's amazing how different individuals will do different things for different reasons. And just exactly who is being assigned to the word "they" now? All military? Only ossifers? Only the ones that claim patriotism?

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    8. Re:What morale? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sure, patriotism is real: it is real propaganda. It exists to manipulate people into using their penchant for violence in the service of people in acknowledged political power--people who themselves have neither virtue, nor morality, nor compassion, and in particular, no good intent whatsoever, as far as the rest of the world is concerned.

      So, you started off a sanctioned killer; discovered what you were; became a leader of voluntary paid killers; and then became a spy for the people who command the voluntary paid killers. Congratulations, you rank with Beria and Putin, who would have cited exactly the same moral rationalizations that you use.

      You couldn't have helped people by becoming a doctor? Or for that matter, a nurse? You had to "help people" by carrying a weapon, by being a volunteer killer-for-hire in a mercenary army? And yet somehow you still think yourself morally justified, even "good." You still have not breached the delusion that caused you to enlist in the first place, even after all of your choices proved, in the event, to have been based on illusions, both about yourself, and about the nature of the job you were signing up to do.

      Some people like to heal, and get paid for it. Others like to kill, harm, or compel--and get paid for it. You are in the latter group; therefore, you are a necessary evil in times of danger, and in times of very little danger, such as now, you are probably not even that; now you are simply an instrument of banal oppression of your fellow citizens.

      When you actually do good in the world, get back to us.

    9. Re:What morale? by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

      I'm not trying to judge one way or another, and I understand the need to have people doing what you did. However, I noticed your username is "Notabadguy". Are you trying to convince us of that, or yourself?

      Not that it matters anymore, but women want bad guys.

    10. Re:What morale? by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

      You couldn't have helped people by becoming a doctor? Or for that matter, a nurse? You had to "help people" by carrying a weapon, by being a volunteer killer-for-hire in a mercenary army?

      I'm not sure you understand what the US armed forces do. Sometimes I daydream that if I were omnipotent, I would force peace on the world - destroy all guns, cause anyone with violent intent to disappear in a flash of light. But I'm not omnipotent, and nor is anyone else. In the meantime, those with the power to resist genocide, oppression, and evil have a moral obligation to do so.

      You can have all the sit-ins you like, tweet from the comfort of your home how the tools of an uncaring corporatist elite are holding down the people - I've fought for your right to do be an asshole and you're welcome to it. None of those empty gestures will stop dictators from gassing their dissidents, or ethnically cleansing people with a different colored skin - or any evil from perpetrating evil. That takes force.

    11. Re:What morale? by ledow · · Score: 1

      I would make a conscious exception for army medics, especially those higher skilled like surgeons etc.. I don't imagine (though I'm not sure) that they are there to kill people.

      But even then... they've basically chosen the job of a doctor/surgeon and then they are ordered to ignore the Hippocratic oath, because they then fail to attend to the enemy wounded too. I'm sure they look after prisoners (though there was little evidence of such at Guantanamo?), I'm sure they mend up their own people, and innocent civilians, but they also walk past enemy wounded/dying? And presumably if they stop to help, they'll be ordered to move on.

      They are possibly the exception but then I don't get why they are an explicit part of one particular military rather than, say, a independent red-cross unit.

      It still doesn't make sense to me. However you cook it, the morals that go with such a job should mean you avoid the military service. Anything else is hypocritical, not Hippocratical.

  3. NATO by M0j0_j0j0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One way they can solve this is the same way as NATO, make them tax exempt on income tax it can help level the field with private pay.

    1. Re:NATO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or we could reform the NSA so you know...it's not a freedom-hating shithole of an organization?

    2. Re:NATO by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Government salaries should be tax exempt a priori, otherwise, it's a Ponzi scheme.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    3. Re:NATO by stinerman · · Score: 2

      It's easier for accounting. Nothing more.

    4. Re:NATO by JeffSh · · Score: 2

      we should have an economy that is far more equal. i do not advocate for a perfectly equal economy, but the highest earner should be much closer to the lowest earner than they are today. wealth and income inequalty break the ability of the government to compete in the marketplace.

      which is probably the point that's happening here, our government is being usurped completely by people who have found a way around it because they have the power and control

  4. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    Old Joke:

    "But Timmy, why did you say your dad is working as a male stripper?"
    "Because it's less embarrassing than admitting he's working at the NSA".

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. The free market will come to the rescue by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just like in Russia. When the KGB did something like that, a man named Eugene Kaspersky saw this as a good moment to start hiring more people...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:The free market will come to the rescue by chispito · · Score: 2

      Just like in Russia. When the KGB did something like that, a man named Eugene Kaspersky saw this as a good moment to start hiring more people...

      If I had to guess, many of the departing employees are already heading to small startups bathing in VC funding. Why be a Security Analyst for the NSA when you can print money as a Security Analyst for Blockchain Security Inc?

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
  6. And nothing... by ant-1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...of value was lost!

    1. Re:And nothing... by RedEars · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your support, comrade.

      --
      He who forgets will be destined to remember. - EV
  7. They'll just go to work for a gov't contractor by SlideRuleGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...who will then charge the gov't 10x what that person was costing us before. So is the NSA's actual functionality being reduced--or just shifted elsewhere?

    (And why are only NSA people demoralized? I'd be demoralized if I worked in _any_ branch of gov't...the way things are going. Private-sector jobs providing goods and services that people actually want is the most satisfying kind of work, IMHO.)

    1. Re:They'll just go to work for a gov't contractor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is so much truth to this, 10x is high, more like 3-4x when the full burdened costs are taken into account. I used to manage the interop matrix and upgrade SOP for a generic comms truck. There were like 200 of these trucks floating around and it took a couple days to upgrade and PM the equipment. It was literally me another guy and 2-5 interns, depending on the time of the year. Some weeks we worked more other weeks we worked less to make up for the extra, but we never missed a deadline and getting done way early didn't really matter as a soldier had to come pick up the truck and drive it who knows where and they operate on soldier schedules. The subbed this out to some rinky dink contractor up the street. When I saw the contract I was shocked. Not just because of the price, but the division of labor. We kept the task of managing the interop matrix and the SOP and had to train them on SOP changes. We also had to do about 1 out of 3 trucks because with the amount of equipment something needed SOP mods. We went from never missing a deadline to missing almost every deadline, because the truck would come to us, then be loaded on another truck, then driven to the contractor, the when complete, loaded back up on a truck, driven back, and unloaded.
      Net net, the decided that it was to costly, so they were going to sub the entire project out to yet another contractor whom I happen to be talking to about another job. I got a more then 2x pay bump, and ended up taking over all the work I used to do. I got a full time helper, and some interns, all making at least 2x what we made before. We had that contract for over 10 years until the base closed. With that contract cost they easily could have paid everyone's salaries with max step and grade increases, and all my other benefits for my entire career and retirement.

    2. Re:They'll just go to work for a gov't contractor by mikael · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's the usual strategy when a right-wing government comes into power. The mantra is "the private sector can do things more efficiently and cheaply that the public sector". So all those departments are required to reduced people count. They then rehire their staff as private sector consultants and contractors to do the same work as before, then claim more jobs have been created while reducing the size of the public sector.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    3. Re:They'll just go to work for a gov't contractor by Agripa · · Score: 1

      (And why are only NSA people demoralized? I'd be demoralized if I worked in _any_ branch of gov't...the way things are going.

      I assume working conditions have gotten worse due to steps taken to prevent future Snowdens.

  8. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by jbmartin6 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    They are probably going to better managed and higher paying jobs as contractors doing the same work for the NSA. Just without all the annoying crap that an actual federal agency has to deal with. And there is this from TFA:

    Although the departure rates are low, compared with attrition levels in the civilian technology industry

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  9. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by rickb928 · · Score: 2

    And that changed when?

    If your answer references a date before January 20, 1981, you are wrong.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  10. Snowden irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Snowden leaks showed they'd built a giant surveillance machine that could be turned at a whim against US citizens.
    Putin showed how trivial it is to leverage party-above-country loyalty and gain access to that surveillance engine with his needy orange puppet.
    THEY are part of that surveillance engine, it's THEIR work that funnels intelligence to US enemies. So of course they don't want to undermine their own country anymore.

    Perhaps Trump will fill the void by co-operating on Intelligence matters with the Putin and the FSB? You might think I'm joking, but that was their original idea, build up muslim terrorism as an excuse to give Russia a pipeline to US intelligence.

    If you notice this:
    "MOSCOW — President Vladimir V. Putin called President Trump on Sunday to thank him for the work of the Central Intelligence Agency in helping prevent an Islamic State attack in the northern Russian city of St. Petersburg." From December...."The attackers planned to strike crowded sites including Kazan Cathedral, a landmark Orthodox Christian church, the statement said.

    This has all the talking point elements: Cooperation, muslims, terrorists....., also leveraging Christian/Republicans/Fox sympathies. It establishes the data flow. Who could object to telling the Russians about a terrorist plot against fellow Christians? Not Fox News certainly, not Republicans...

    So don't be surprised if you hear more Russian voices at the NSA and see more data flows to the Russians. They're not idiots, they were misguided patriots.

  11. No loss by Anti_Gnostic · · Score: 1

    Same people who couldn't foresee arc of the Arab Spring.

    1. Re:No loss by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      The Arab spring was predicted, but the predictions were discounted because they were unbelievable. We trusted hindsight instead of the data.

      I don't recall the exact methodology, but it's something about the population distribution and unemployment. My recollection is that it's something about more people unemployed people between 15 and 25 than employed 30+ that it rolls up with a very strong correlation. Let me see if I can dig up the reference.

  12. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sure, because the previous presidents weren’t plutocratic oligarchs who dreams of being the Putin of the West. Such things severely affect morale.

  13. This is nothing new by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    these guys can clear $500k/yr working for Wallstreet. It's no wonder they don't want to settle for $140k/yr working for Uncle Sam. Having their Boss call them out for being part of the "Deep State" conspiracy is just a dingleberry on that shit cake.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      these guys can clear $500k/yr working for Wallstreet. It's no wonder they don't want to settle for $140k/yr working for Uncle Sam. Having their Boss call them out for being part of the "Deep State" conspiracy is just a dingleberry on that shit cake.

      As a non native speaker I didn't know the meaning of the word "dingleberry" and looked it up ... Thank you for my new personal nightmare.

    2. Re:This is nothing new by krlynch · · Score: 4, Informative

      You forgot to factor in Locality adjustment. DC area base at step 10 is $126k. Additionally, federal employee benefits are very generous, including pension benefits that are generally unavailable in the comparable private sector jobs.

    3. Re:This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep. The bennies are where it's at in civil service jobs. People on the outside really have no idea how good those benefits really are. I play golf with a few retired civil servants. They retired at 50, get most of their pay and full medical. And then they get part time work to pile onto the money they get from their pensions. Sweet gig actually.

    4. Re:This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How great the Bennies use-to-be. This myth needs to die in a tire fire. The insurances are nothing all that great and cost the same, if not more, then what you see in private industry. The retirement plan has been gutted for anyone who has joined in the last 20 years and has mostly been reduced to a blind 405K style matched investment plan, and the pension is a possibility, but, it is only worth it if you plan to stay in the Federal work for force for over 30 years (which also means stagnant pay to remain in the gov). The biggest thing going right now is that they still separate out sick leave and annual leave.
         

  14. SHA... right, right! by mpeaton · · Score: 2

    Probably some of them are BTC rich.

  15. I interviewed a candidate from NSA last year. . . by Salgak1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    . . . .among her complaints were being pigeonholed (i.e. if you were good at a particular thing, they want you to concentrate on that thing, instead of broadening one's skill base), promotions were glacial (she had her Masters and STILL was a GS-9-equivalent), and the pay is abysmal, compared to their peers in the private sector.

    On the other hand, 6 years experience out of undergrad, plus a Masters, and she wanted 300+K. You're not going to get that ANYWHERE in Club Feb. . . .

  16. Re:Nor surprising really, with a $230K max salary by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A quick check reveals that there are approximately 12,989 federal employees making salary more than the VP, in fact.

    Virtually all work for the VA and are medical officers, doctors, or dentists. Many are employed by NIH as medical officers. A few by the military as, you may have guessed, medical officers, and a stray here and there by the FDIC, SEC, etc.Six federal employees make $400,000 or more. I do not include awards, which boost pay, but we're talking salary here.

    Mind you, 13,000 employees in the US government is a relatively minuscule sample. You're not out earning the VP even for typical agency executive positions. But for doctors you have to compete, since asking a skilled MD to take an 80% pay cut isn't realistic, and a variety of skilled workers such as attorneys or financial experts likewise.

    I'm not yet as concerned about the NSA being unable to retain experienced talent as I ought to be, because the mission of the NSA has been so perverted that a certain level of incompetence is appealing. But selective incompetence is what I would like, and that doesn't work either.

    Time to restrain the surveillance state. A valuable but appropriate mission might attract good candidates. Restraining the self-righteous or over zealous might be part of the impetus for this exodus...

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  17. Their Overarching Motivation Vanished by EndlessNameless · · Score: 2

    Trump has called out the intelligence community as being part of some "deep state" conspiracy. True or not, that clearly indicates he will view their work as suspect.

    If anyone worked in that agency with a sincere desire to protect the American people and inform their national leaders of threats against the country, then that person's motivation is going to evaporate. When your leader has basically announced that he won't extend any consideration or trust to your organization, is there any value to your work? At the end of the day, what will all of your efforts accomplish?

    This is not encouraging at all, but I can understand why they might feel this way.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:Their Overarching Motivation Vanished by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      If anyone worked in that agency with a sincere desire to protect the American people and inform their national leaders of threats against the country, then that person's motivation is going to evaporate.

      I really question how many people are described by this. I still don't see how one can call themselves a patriot when they violate the 4th amendment around the clock.

    2. Re:Their Overarching Motivation Vanished by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      If anyone worked in that agency with a sincere desire to protect the American people and inform their national leaders of threats against the country, then that person's motivation is going to evaporate. When your leader has basically announced that he won't extend any consideration or trust to your organization, is there any value to your work? At the end of the day, what will all of your efforts accomplish?

      And that's the problem: The pay is *not bad* though less than private for some folks. So what's the motivation to stay? Serving your country and all that. When the President starts bad-mouthing what you do, why you do it, and calling into question your patriotic motivations, YES, it's no longer worth it.

      This is why I've just left Federal servoce.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:Their Overarching Motivation Vanished by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 2

      So how do you reconcile Trump's attitude as the cause when rate of the people leaving the NSA as described started in 2015, peaked in 2016 and then went down once Trump was elected?

      I guess you could blame Obama instead, but back in the non-politically-motivated reality you seem to have missed, less than 1% turnover in a few years is still lower than most government agencies and certainly most companies. It's probably just people noticing they can make more money in the private sector because security analysts are in higher demand over the last few years.

      But hey, keep posting your fact-free opinions and interpretations and I'll keep agreeing with your signature.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    4. Re:Their Overarching Motivation Vanished by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "I still don't see how one can call themselves a patriot when they violate the 4th amendment around the clock."
      People are told it was always against the Soviet Union, Russia, other nations mils, bad people in other nations.
      That legal generational group think within an agency flows to forums, chat sites, popular culture, movies.

      When the 4 hops of illegal domestic spying is questioned the usual decades of talking points get rolled out.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  18. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by rickb928 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Oh, January 20, 2009.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  19. Re: Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarc by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The low pay and low morale take a while to set in. So it existed with Obama too. The trick is now Trump is calling them liars and unamerican on a daily basis on top of everything else.

    I expect in the next year to see higher turnover at the FBI too.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  20. Demoralized by StormReaver · · Score: 2

    I can completely understand NSA workers being demoralized. Their mission has changed from protecting U.S. citizens from externals threats to becoming the threat to U.S. citizens. If my job were to continuously violate the U.S. Constitution, and thereby be hated by most of America, I would be demoralized, too.

    1. Re:Demoralized by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      not really. What snowden reported was that a FEW of the employees had mismanaged the data and clearances. That is it.
      The real issue now, is having a president that is claiming that the entire intelligence world is lying, when they are reporting that the president , VP, and others in the admin were committing treason and half of CONgress is claiming that they are lying.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  21. Their jobs were obsolete anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The people who have left were responsible for collecting and analyzing the intelligence that goes into the president's daily briefing

    Their jobs have been replaced by a script that generates random quotes from FoxNews with the President's name on it and happy emoji faces.

  22. Re:3 important points folks made here... apk by Salgak1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is SOME truth here: Government pay DOES seriously lag behind private sector pay. But the contracting world isn't MUCH better. High-end federal contractors make perhaps a quarter to a third higher than "govvies", but the 10 times cost of a fed is an exaggeration. On the average, a contractor, at fully-burdened rate, costs somewhat more than a Fed does, for the same skills and experience (and that varies by the skill in question, and location), but not overwhelmingly more.

    The advantage to contractors, is that they can be dropped almost immediately at no cost to the Government. An actual Fed can drag out a dismissal for years, collecting pay and seniority while doing so. And in the meantime, if they transfer to another agency. . . the attempt to drop them goes away. . .

  23. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by PoopJuggler · · Score: 2

    But it comes with a box of crayons and a free ice cream cone!

  24. Contracting, or just frustration? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Believe it or not, there are still people who are loyal to the country and "believe in the mission." Lots of people in these agencies come from the military, so you're bound to have a committed core of individuals. But it's an organization like anywhere else...the place I work has serious faults but they're definitely not something to throw a temper tantrum about. Some people think differently about this, get fed up and leave. It's all up to personal choice, and I would think anyone smart enough to get a technical position at the NSA would be able to go work anywhere else...these aren't your typical Keyboarding Specialist III civil service workers who make a home for themselves deep in an agency's bureaucracy. I don't throw a fit and leave my position because I have the opportunity to do interesting work even if I have to work around dumb decisions above my level.

    Just like businesses, government agencies outsource everything they can as well. I would think that some of the defection is to contractors, where they would trade job security for a higher salary. I imagine there's basically a few "Spies R Us" firms right in the DC metro area that does the same analysis work the official TLAs do.

    Another place they could end up at is management consulting firms. I work for an IT services company and we respond to RFPs all the time -- there's a lot of pressure to keep up the credentials on the individuals presented as the "A Team" (who gets swapped out when the contract is signed.) There's a lot of cache in saying "Dude, this guy's ex-NSA" when referring to a security consultant. Even if they barely do any work, just having them is like the big tech companies employing Technical Fellows.

    Still other employers are basically anywhere else math geniuses get jobs. Insurance companies still pay actuaries handsomely. Investment banks doing HFT would love to have a few NSA people on staff and would probably overlook some of their quirks. The private sector does pay much better than government work over the short term. And, post-Cold War and post-Snowden, there's less public acceptance of the spy agencies. I'm sure there's tons of issues they silently prevent or give advance notice of, and I'll bet that's what's keeping some people on staff...it's naive to think that other countries aren't spying on their citizens or foreign governments as well.

    1. Re:Contracting, or just frustration? by zifn4b · · Score: 1

      It's all up to personal choice, and I would think anyone smart enough to get a technical position at the NSA would be able to go work anywhere else...these aren't your typical Keyboarding Specialist III civil service workers who make a home for themselves deep in an agency's bureaucracy.

      Yes, yes. I heard in Opportunist's above post, some of them have quite advanced exotic dancing skills. Quite valuable in the private sector at certain establishments.

      --
      We'll make great pets
    2. Re:Contracting, or just frustration? by Subm · · Score: 1

      > Believe it or not, there are still people who are loyal to the country and "believe in the mission."

      If the mission has something to do with following the Constitution and "We the people," probably most of us are. The Constitution is a great document. The most prominent violators of the Constitution are in the White House, enriching themselves at the expense of the mission.

  25. Re: Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarc by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I expect in the next year to see higher turnover at the FBI to

    Here's the best part. The more the con artist keeps whining about the FBI doing its job, the more people leave and the more he can whine about them not doing their job.

    The same with the NSA. This is one of many organizations he has called part of the "deep state", that the information they provide is worthless, they don't know what they're doing and so on.

    Well golly gee, who wants to work for someone who is an incompetent idiot, a serial liar and thinks what you do is worthless?

    What's that old adage about high turnover of employees? It's not them, it's you.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  26. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by currently_awake · · Score: 1, Funny

    You can't lay off those people, the president will need them in 2020 for her presidential briefs!

  27. Government employment by shaksys · · Score: 1

    So employees of a government run organization are not seeing similar pay increases (cost of living, experience, etc) as the free market employees see? WHAT A SURPRISE!!

    1. Re:Government employment by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "So employees of a government run organization are not seeing similar pay increases (cost of living, experience, etc) as the free market employees see? "

      The GCHQ did a lot of work on that issue in the 1950-70's. What insight did the Soviet Union have about once loyal staff that had offers to spy accepted?
      Staff got blackmailed? Political? Cash? Long working hours globally? Poor working conditions at US and US sites around the world for very low pay?

      After much funding, review and study the results got presented.
      Good working conditions, actual background investigations to ensure loyalty, really good wages, a good location to work in the UK kept well educated vetted staff loyal.
      Once that was understood the Soviet Union had less to offer most impoverished staff and the need to spy for cash/lifestyle was reduced generationally.
      Political and lifestyle issues could be found out with a good investigation before been given a job.

      So all that worked well for decades. The perfect spy agency got great results in Ireland, countering the USA funding of Ireland, with global collection.

      All would have been good but domestic US/UK politics was about to change the security services in an unexpected way. US and UK politics has now placed political demands the US and UK spy agency hiring practices.
      Virtue signalling political leaders now want to fill the security services with new "citizens" with no background investigations. The people who have no loyalty to the UK/USA but have to be given government jobs as they are now "citizens". Criminal groups, other nations spies, cults, faith groups are now entering the US and UK security services via affirmative action and political correctness in vast numbers.
      Soon many new low and mid ranking staff will have no background investigations will be walking out with all secrets all day, every day.

      Good pay solved all the problems until the 1990's but now political considerations about who to hire have now set the security services back to the 1910-40's levels of internal security. Anyone wanting a job has to be given equal consideration to be accepted into the security services. The openings to accept new staff are now filling up with people with no skills and no loyalty to their country. A failed or no background investigation is not a reason not to hire someone.
      So the security services will soon look and function like any other government run organization. Below average staff with their own interests, faiths, community.
      People who want to spy will have to be caught spying rather than not been accepted as a security risk.
      Until then they are now a trusted part of the "government".
      Background investigations are been ignored on political guidelines of acceptance rather than any security considerations. Everyone loyal in the security services will be watching their own new staff for spying rather than doing real work. Criminals, cults, faith groups, other nations are presenting as many applicants as they can as they have to be accepted.
      Many spies will have to be accepted due to affirmative action and will rise up the ranks until caught.
      Decades of new work for the FBI and MI5.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Michelle Bachman, or will it be Condoleezza Rice?

  29. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Woldscum · · Score: 2

    “Nearly 30,000 rank-and-file federal employees who received more than $190,823 out-earned each of the 50 state governors,” the report said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

  30. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by tekin112000 · · Score: 1

    Not to mention all the other demands of working for a three letter agency. I have read that NSA workers must submit to; random phone taps, investigators check with neighbors asking about your sex life, any aspect of your life can be reviewed at anytime. All this plus low morale, average pay in an expensive city. No wonder positions are hard to fill

  31. Re: Good news for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is hilariously stupid.

    It's not saving any money, or draining any "swamps".

    The same positions exist, paying the same rate, and are now being occupied by less-skilled stand-ins to defend the nation against hostile foreign intelligence agencies.

  32. Oh by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    For a second there, I was extremely worried. I read NASA instead of NSA.

    Carry on.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  33. Re:Nor surprising really, with a $230K max salary by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    I think you're optimistic.

    I think the increasingly lucrative market (much from repressive governments) for exploits and surveillance/datamining has more to do with the exodus. Globalism lets them sell their soul to international buyers, instead of the US government.

  34. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

    Since 2015, the NSA has lost several hundred hackers, engineers and data scientists, according to current and former U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter

    I didn't know that Trump took office in 2015... Trump: Winning even before winning!

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  35. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    All true. I turned down two jobs from the NSA, and have a lot of friends on the contractor side in DoD and cyber-command.. The pre-hire screening alone is pretty intrusive on the personal life side, but it's not flat out discriminatory and blunt like it used to be 10-15 years ago, but if you're an 'ass puckerer' they will know you lied on your lie detector test anyway.

    It's like any organization I guess, government or private; they say all the post-hire screening is 'random', but if you're on someone's list, you'll get it often to find a reason.

    But as for people leaving, I can see why they do. But alot of them took it partly for the 'cool' factor of having a job you can't talk about, nor who you do it for. Second thought was knowing how F ridiculous getting up into the upper GS scales where you are getting paid well, even for bloated Baltimore/DC pay inflation scales vs. other government areas, and not working for what most probably started at out of college as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th movement into a new or escalation into their career. That's why EVERYONE does contracting; the contracts the companies get are fucking filthy thick with money, and anyone I know who is a contractor doing that type of cyber work + has a clearance, usually clears no less than 120-150K at a minimum, and if you're REALLY good, way fucking more. Only NSA management is making that unless you're on black payrolls.

  36. Re:Good news for the rest of us by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 2

    Not exactly. It would be good news if they had quit because of conscience problems.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  37. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This "news" is far from honest. It is not "rank and file" employees making over $200k. It is medical specialists (such as the top earner, a heart surgeon with the VA) who could earn way more outside of federal employment, or members of the Senior Executive Service or political appointees. They make no mention of the type of job the individuals are doing (for example, the NASA examples are senior people in charge of a Center, another is in charge of Human Space Exploration for the nation, etc with similar for other agencies). This fails to account that Uncle Sam pays less than these same people would earn in the private sector.

    Of course, if your goal is to shut down the federal government by driving out experienced, competent people, and racing to the bottom...then their report makes sense.

    Heck, their critique of the Presidio Trust mentions it is self sustaining, (as in was started with federal tax funds but doesn't any more as it brings in more than it needs) but only in passing and criticizes the high salary of its director (they imply he is simply an HR drone, when he is an executive- think C-level office-, and they are located in SF, CA and therefore the salaries are adjusted for the location). Every federal job falles into a job classification known as a "series". The series title is very generic. (HR, General Engineer, Lawyer, etc). Even SES types are assigned a series based on the job they do and the people they oversee. This report fails to explain that allowing the generic series titles appear we as taxpayers are overpaying for the work people are doing.

  38. Re:I interviewed a candidate from NSA last year. . by swb · · Score: 2

    We suffer from reverse pigeonholing -- everyone is expected to be a generalist on every subject *and* a specialist on particular subjects when tasked with it.

    I'm not sure which is worse, really. I work with some people with EMC storage experience and their knowledge of closely related technologies is near zero (the guy who installs iSCSI storage couldn't configure the needed VLAN access or set jumbo frames in any switch if his life depended on it). They even say stupid things, the really hard-core EMC guy talks up fiber channel by talking about Ethernet as if shared-access hubs were still installed someplace.

    I'm more on the enforced generalist, demanded specialist side and I'm sure I do equally stupid things, but it's unavoidable when training is "read these PDFs" and "watch this webinar".

  39. Re:Good news for the rest of us by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Would that be thee conscience of spying on Americans for political reasons, or working for DJT administration?

    I know plenty of people who find spying on Americans okay, but only because it was Obama doing it on Trump. I'm sure if the hypocritical roles were reversed, they would be OUTRAGED!!!!

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  40. Re:Good news for the rest of us by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1, Troll

    Not exactly. It would be good news if they had quit because of conscience problems.

    There are roles that should cause people to be shunned. I know that for me if someone said they worked for the CIA or NSA I'd avoid them while making lots of sarcastic remarks and I'd tell others as well. I've done this in the past for other jobs that I consider bad for society, like the guy I essentially called scum for operating a pay day loan place. The NSA doesn't have a leg to stand on in terms of being a force for good. Now if they used their massive powers for good then I could get behind them at least a bit more and they could be upgraded to the category of mixed bag instead of purely evil.

  41. This is very low turnover by magzteel · · Score: 2

    An employer with 21,000 employees losing "several hundred" over two to three years would be thrilled.

    A better headline might be "NSA has 99.9% annual employee retention rate"

  42. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    > You can't lay off those people, the president will need them in 2020 for her presidential briefs!

    Are you sure Sarah Palin wears briefs. Boxers?

    Still, Hillary has larger testicles than any of them.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  43. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    > rendering all such briefs obsolete

    So all we'll have left is boxers.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  44. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by ghoul · · Score: 1

    Lady Gaga

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  45. Re:Good news for the rest of us by stinerman · · Score: 1

    I don't think it's ok either way, but if it absolutely had to happen, I'd rather Obama be doing it rather than Trump. YMMV, of course.

    I don't think there's anything wrong with this belief one way or the other. We just have to be honest about it.

  46. Before everyone takes the typical leap to Trump by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    "Since 2015, the NSA has lost several hundred hackers, engineers and data scientists, according to current and former U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter."

    I don't think Trump was president in 2015, but I could be wrong.

  47. Re:Nor surprising really, with a $230K max salary by stinerman · · Score: 1

    Like most things, the money we spend on them is directly proportional to the importance we place on them. Notwithstanding your complaints about the mission change, if you think that what the NSA does is not important because, for example, what you know is true and the NSA contradicts it, then it makes sense that you are not concerned with losing experienced people. They do not contribute anything in that case.

    This is why in most states the highest paid state employee is a college sports coach. We attach enormous importance as a society to sports and having our publicly-funded teams perform well -- much more so than retaining good police officers or teachers or other state-employed people.

  48. Re:Good news for the rest of us by GrumpySteen · · Score: 2

    I remember how The NSA's mass surveillance started coming to light in 2013 with the exposure of the PRISM program, then Edward Snowden revealed a shitload more in 2014. Almost everyone, including many members of congress, lost their shit over it and the NSA actually backed off on some of the mass surveillance they'd been doing.

    I also remember how the people were in favor of the mass surveillance insisted it was necessary to stop al-Qaeda from another attack like 9-11. And how those people kept claiming Obama was a Muslim and kept demanding his birth certificate even after it had been released.

    Funny how you're painting those people as Obama supporters now.

  49. Re: Good news for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well pay day loans are pretty much designed to constantly bleed people dry who use them, so even if he's judgmental, he's not wrong in my opinion.

    Those places are shitty and should be illegal.

  50. Re:Nor surprising really, with a $230K max salary by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    "what you know is true and the NSA contradicts it"

    Actually, this has nothing to do with why most of the people I hear denigrate the NSA do so. their complaints include:

    - Excessive collection; they get everything, even things there is not a clear legal permission for.
    - Unwarranted distribution; Some of what they get is given out where it ought not be. Some of this is legal, so the real complaint here starts with laws permittign excess collection and distribution, of course.

    Not about the quality or veracity of the information, though that's important, but challenging the NSA's collection of domestic intelligence in particular, is apparently offending many of the NSA employees who are leaving. Some are disappointed that their mission and actual actions are being challenged, and they don't believe they should be questioned so.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  51. They need to pay more by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    I applied to Cybercom last year. I have over 20 years of technical and technical leadership experience - they offered me a salary of $86K. Have fun living anywhere near Ft Meade on that - never mind that making almost twice that I have mortgage and bills to match.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  52. Good news for the rest of us? by thomst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From TFS:

    The people who have left were responsible for collecting and analyzing the intelligence that goes into the president's daily briefing.

    Daily intelligence briefings for the Chief Executive used to be a vitally important component of policy formulation. Then President Chump was sworn in, and suddenly they became completely irrelevant, because they bored him. He refuses to read or even listen to them, even when they mostly contain brightly-colored graphics, videos, and other visual elements designed to appeal to the functional-illiterate-in-chief. They've also been tailored to avoid topics, such as the latest intelligence on Russian psyops interference in the 2016 election, that push the Orange Oaf's buttons. (Let me point you to an alternative citation, because the Washington Post article may be paywalled for those who don't know how to use private browsing and cookie deletion to get around it.)

    Think about how you'd feel if you had dedicated your career to producing detailed, highly-nuanced, daily reports on a whole range of intelligence topics for the most powerful national leader on the planet - only to discover that the new guy is completely uninterested in any information that can't be expressed in crayon drawings and bumper sticker catchphrases. Now throw in civil servant wages, and ask yourself whether that job would be in any way attractive to you?

    Yeah - it's like that.

    That's why they're leaving ...

    --
    Check out my novel.
  53. Re: Good news for the rest of us by Moof123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If we could actually be sure the targets were kept foreign, sure. Instead we have ample evidence that the NSA has cast a much wider net, and undermined much of our infrastructure to assure they can gain access. The result is a porous compute infrastructure that keeps being broken. Now we will never know how many exploits were intentionally placed, but any non-zero number is too many. With no trust I see a brain drain there as a net positive until the organization has a real come-to-jesus moment and stops sweeping up the citizenry in their dragnet operations.

  54. So, no loss.... by ewhenn · · Score: 1

    From the summary: "The people who have left were responsible for collecting and analyzing the intelligence that goes into the president's daily briefing."

    Not much of a loss for now, the president doesn't read anyways. Let's hope they all these people got hired by Fox News, though I highly doubt it.

  55. Re: Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarc by fatwilbur · · Score: 1

    You simply can't change the culture of a workplace without a significant turnover of existing employees. This is what I've hoped for at the NSA/FBI for years. Keep on calling 'em out.

  56. Re:I interviewed a candidate from NSA last year. . by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

    "the guy who installs iSCSI storage couldn't configure the needed VLAN access or set jumbo frames in any switch if his life depended on it" ouch. His life might not depend on it, but your network's life certainly does. Honestly, it's probably a GOOD thing that he can't configure jumbo frames on a non-vlaned iSCSI system. Your network just might not crash quite as fast. It still will probably crash out from being flooded with iSCSI traffic, just might take a bit longer. At least knowing that it will make your inevitable troubleshooting / cleanup job easier.

  57. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    shocking! some federal government employees make more than.... state government employees.

    Most federal employees are on the GS scale or its equivalent, that tops out at 160K, including a high-cost area locality.

    Most states are rural, where the cost of living is much lower than say DC where a lot of federal employees live.

    The fact that the salary quoted is above GS15, I would guess the federal employees are senior executives. Why not compare those salaries with senior executives in fortune 500 companies? I doubt you will see many private sector senior executives at $190K.

    But by all means continue spreading the FUD

  58. Re: Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarc by erapert · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...Trump is calling them liars and unamerican on a daily basis...

    Are they not liars? Have they not lied to the American public and kept secrets from the very public they ostensibly serve?
    Is it not un-American to spy on everyone at all times and assist in undermining the liberty of the American people?

    Our forefathers fought wars over less.

  59. Re:Good news for the rest of us by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Produce you these people you "KNow" were spying on Trump for Obama.
    Go ahead.
    Any loudmouth rightie can repeat a lie claiming firsthand knowledge.
    Let's see you back that up.

  60. Re:Good news for the rest of us by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

    I don't think it's ok either way, but

    Everything after that is exactly why it is is a problem. There is no "but". It should have been "period".

    The fact that Obama actually DID it is reason enough for it to NEVER be "butt", and always be "period".

    if it absolutely had to happen

    What was the "absolutely had to happen" reason for spying on American Reporters? I'm still waiting for any explanation that doesn't stink.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  61. Re:Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarch by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    So why did they start resigning beginning in 2015 then?

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  62. Re:I interviewed a candidate from NSA last year. . by swb · · Score: 1

    The problem, though, is that these highly silo'd guys make all kinds of recommendations about things they know nothing about *and* they are the first to point fingers when their zillion dollar system doesn't work right. Their troubleshooting doesn't extend beyond the product's logging facility.

  63. Re:President's Daily Intelligence Briefing by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The traditional mil work done by the US army and navy was just too good. They know what they are doing when they look at other nations mil and the reports did not allow for political spin.
    The CIA can do the international spy work. The FBI can fully protect the USA.

    The why of the NSA is a historical issue that goes back to the end of WW2 and not wanting to trust the Navy, Army code breakers, domestic reports by the FBI.
    A new agency with new methods, trusted new staff and global collection.
    The Army would try and out smart the Navy, The Navy was competitive with the US army about who could get and present the same results. Duplication of results set in. The US wanted to be first with new results, not too late with duplicated Army/Navy results.
    The FBI and what would be the CIA had their own internal politics, leadership and power. So the NSA was seen as a new political tool to ensure less duplication and would be totally politically loyal. A new agency for global and domestic collection. Beholden and controlled by its budget.
    Re 'Could they employ much younger people"

    Younger people have not been tested to see how they respond to illegal domestic collection. Different people respond to illegal domestic spying in different ways.
    Thats why illegal domestic collection is not a problem internally and any comments on that topic are not accepted.
    Everyone who advances is tested to see how they react to domestic collection. If they accept the color of law that domestic collection is allowed they are advanced. If they attempt to report domestic collection as been illegal they are giving other work that will only be the result of international collection.
    That testing and introduction to domestic collection takes time and so "younger people" have to wait until they can be trusted to work on illegal domestic projects.
    Once inducted into domestic spying and proven loyal they are finally accepted and trusted internally. That takes time and is a slow process of tasks, projects, color of law and everyone responds in different ways. Once people with a strong legal objection to domestic collection are discovered and guided to safe busy work the rest of the staff who will work on collection get promoted. That growth in staff every generation is an indication of the feeling to the legality of domestic spying.
    The Vietnam, late 1970's mid 1980's spy hunts, 1990's, finding all domestic protesters.

    The GCHQ solved all that by just hiring loyal people with skills and giving staff a really good wage after the 1970's with a clear domestic and international mandate.
    With no stress about spying staff enjoyed the tasks and a better esprit de corps that was sustained over the decades. A good wage, nice area of the UK to work in, support and further educational options. 9 to 5 GMT.
    The NSA did not have that ability given the easy to understand wording of the US constitution and had to use color of law to try and let staff understand domestic spying was ok.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  64. Re: Good news for the rest of us by kgwilliam · · Score: 1

    The technical people are leaving. The technical people are not the ones who decide who to spy on. Losing all of the NSA's technical people won't stop the lawmakers from abusing the system, it will just make them abuse it with less talented people - people who will probably leave bigger and uglier holes.

  65. Re:Nor surprising really, with a $230K max salary by stinerman · · Score: 1

    I didn't mean you as in rickb928. I meant the you as in someone who knows what is true based on what he sees on Fox and Friends and then the NSA says "well, actually...". That means the NSA actually does negative work because they aren't confirming the pre-existing biases of that person.

  66. Re:Good news for the rest of us by stinerman · · Score: 1

    Come on. This is like me saying "if you had to be raped would you prefer the person be attractive or ugly" and you saying "attractive" and then me saying "AHA! Archangel Michael *WANTS* to be raped!"

    People should be honest about their motivations. My belief is that faced with the choice of Donald Trump v. Barack Obama, I'd rather Obama be doing the bad thing because I think he'd be more careful about minimizing the bad in the bad thing he's doing. Give me any two people, and I'll tell you who I'd prefer. I'd prefer me doing it to Obama. I might even prefer you doing it to Obama! Probably, even!

  67. Re: Good news for the rest of us by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

    I guess by "defend the nation against hostile foreign intelligence agencies" you mean "spy on its own citizens".

  68. NSA by liprippinrods · · Score: 1

    I worked at NSA. I would love to work for Trump and every liberal should be monitored.

  69. Re:Good news for the rest of us by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    False dichotomy is false dichotomy. Rape victims don't care how "attractive" their rapist is. I'd rather not be raped. Period. There is no alternative that is acceptable.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  70. Re:Good news for the rest of us by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    I didn't say "Trump", I said "Americans". And there is plenty of evidence out there, from James Clapper lying to congress, to James Rosen being spied upon.

    But why ruin your narrative with facts.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  71. Re: Nobody wants to work for authoritarian oligarc by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

    I looked at an NSA job once about 10 years ago. Onccccce. The pay was ludicrously low.

  72. Re:Good news for the rest of us by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Nobody said the spying was acceptable. Stinerman said that he'd prefer Obama was running a domestic spying operation than Trump, not that either were acceptable.

    Since you're distracted by the "attractive", here's a replacement question: would you prefer to be raped by a more violent attacker or a less violent attacker? I'd guess that (a) you'd rather not be raped, and (b) if you were raped, you'd prefer the less violent rapist.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  73. this is actually scary and bad by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    One thing about NSA is that they do not have any real powers, other than to spy and USED to keep American networks safe.
    As such, they spend all their time listening in on what foreign gov and terrorists were up to so as to avoid any foolishness on our part.
    Now, with this crumbling, the west is likely to have less intel which will mean that is is easier for a foreign power to set off a war.
    Keep in mind that we saw what happens when NSA is forced to lie, even by our own side. We invaded Iraq based on out and out lies by W's admin. Worst of all, they forced the NSA to back him at first and they did to their discredit. NSA is supposed to be about FACTS, not about lies.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  74. Re:3 important points folks made here... apk by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Nope. In the intelligence world, pay is fairly decent. The reason is that when you have ppl accessing classified information, you do not want them to be tempted or need to sell.
    OTOH, getting money to accomplish things varies from year to year.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  75. Re:The point was missed by magzteel · · Score: 1

    The people who leave are always the best, never the worst. That is the curse of government employment.

    It's true no matter who the employer is. The best always look for better opportunities

  76. problem vs solution by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    PROBLEM: Many NSA officers are decent red-blooded Americans who signed up to serve their country and protect it from foreign enemies. Fighting the Soviets, the Chinese, Dr Evil, etc.

    Now they are demoralized. Because their job has nothing to do with defending against foreign threats, and everything to do with turning America into a police surveillance state. They basically work for the Stasi, and don't like it.

    PROPOSED SOLUTION: Crank up spending on the Stasi surveillance state!

  77. Re:Good news for the rest of us by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    Well, drain it of their most capable.

    Close enough.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  78. Re: Good news for the rest of us by stinerman · · Score: 1

    Well if I've learned anything in this thread it's that you should posit that corrupt criminal exercises should not exist and then pat yourself on the back for not actually furthering the discussion in any way.

  79. Re:Good news for the rest of us by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    And ONCE more, no shred of evidence by you in support of your claim.