Slashdot Mirror
Senate Confirms Trump's Pick for NSA, Cyber Command (politico.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The Senate Tuesday quietly confirmed President Donald Trump's nominee to lead the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command. U.S. Army Cyber Command chief Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone was unanimously confirmed by voice vote to serve as the "dual-hat" leader of both organizations. The two have shared a leader since the Pentagon established Cyber Command in 2009. He will replace retiring Navy Adm. Mike Rogers after a nearly four-year term. The Senate Intelligence and Armed Services committees both previously approved Nakasone's nomination by voice vote.
The Senate Tuesday quietly confirmed President Donald Trump's nominee...
What do you mean 'quietly'? Are you implying that they were trying to hide it? I hate how news organizations have started using this phrase haphazardly to try to make it seem like something nefarious is going on...
USA Cyber command, which was started in 2009, is really just an arm of the NSA. It makes perfect sense from a political view point for the lead of the NSA to also oversee the Cyber command. One counter argument to this might be that Cyber command is/was intended to be defensive focused while the NSA is focused on all communication intelligence both offensive and defensive. At some level there is likely to be some management structure that is only Cyber Command focused. This story is likely a non-event.
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
confirmed1
It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to run NASA, but really?
Couldn't they find ANYONE else to run it?
Based on the Facebook stuff, they seem to not understand how the tubes work...
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
As it stands, only about a quarter of the age eligible population is able to join the armed forces. If Cyber Command had become its own service then they could have opened recruiting to anyone who was willing to do the work, study hard, and become a member. As it stands, the ranks will be closed to those who are not a member of the physical elite.
Not only dies this close the door to service by those who are not in near perfect physical condition; but it also limits the pool of potential candidates based on a factor that has nothing to do with their acumen at cyber-security.
this is a pretty important appointment. Someone who has oversight over a lot of questionable practices. You'd expect a little more talk on both sides. If he's just a great candidate Trump should be tooting his horn (after all, most Trump appointees have been questionable at best and horrifyingly bad at worst). If not, this is just another example of how both sides are really only in the tank for the mega corps.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So that just means we don't get to know who voted for this guy, or even if there were enough votes for him to carry.
No, it means the guy was confirmed overwhelmingly (the article states it was unanimous). Congress will do voice votes when there's no serious opposition to the matter at hand. If a Senator didn't like him, that Senator could have raised an objection and forced a on-the-record vote. That didn't happen, so you can assume that everyone present in Senate was fine with him.
Are we for or against this nomination, or do we not care?
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
As it stands, only about a quarter of the age eligible population is able to join the armed forces. If Cyber Command had become its own service then they could have opened recruiting to anyone who was willing to do the work, study hard, and become a member. As it stands, the ranks will be closed to those who are not a member of the physical elite.
As it stands today, the United States Military could not function without the generous assistance of a few hundred thousand contractors supporting it. And a lot of those contractors were former military members who simply grew well beyond their former physical limitations.
Not only dies this close the door to service by those who are not in near perfect physical condition; but it also limits the pool of potential candidates based on a factor that has nothing to do with their acumen at cyber-security.
Couldn't agree with you more here, but let's be honest for a minute. How many potential candidates within the "uber-hacker" ranks would pass a background investigation for a security clearance, as well as a drug test? Physical conditioning is likely the least qualifying concern.
A new service takes money away from the CIA and NSA computer funding.
Every new mission completed wold take prestige away from existing agencies.
Best to keep it within the existing command structure and allow all winning to be the result of existing "cyber" teams.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
That's not the real question to me. To me the real question is "Is he an expert in the field?". This time nobody seems to be saying either yes or no.
FWIW, I think picking the head of a government department by a popularity contest is mindbogglingly stupid, but I can't really think of a better way. The guy needs political support to do his job, but he also needs to understand the job, and the jobs are all different, so a standardized test would be worthless.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I am American and many people are saying this is naother example of the huge successfully management of USA departments under amazing president trump that didn't exist with idiot Obama.
Found President Trump's secret /. account.