Slashdot Mirror


Minister in Charge of Japan's Cybersecurity Says He Has Never Used a Computer (nytimes.com)

Futurepower(R) shares a report: A lot of people don't use computers. Most of them aren't in charge of a nation's cybersecurity. But one is. Japanese lawmakers were aghast on Wednesday when Yoshitaka Sakurada, 68, the minister who heads the government's cybersecurity office, said during questioning in Parliament that he had no need for the devices, and appeared confused when asked basic technology questions. "I have been independently running my own business since I was 25 years old," he said. When computer use is necessary, he said, "I order my employees or secretaries" to do it. [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source.] "I don't type on a computer," he added.

Asked by a lawmaker if nuclear power plants allowed the use of USB drives, a common technology widely considered to be a security risk, Mr. Sakurada did not seem to understand what they were. "I don't know details well," he said. "So how about having an expert answer your question if necessary, how's that?" The comments were immediately criticized. "I can't believe that a person who never used a computer is in charge of cybersecurity measures," said Masato Imai, an opposition lawmaker.

34 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. This is new? by Ubi_NL · · Score: 5, Informative

    I could argue that the US president knows a similar amount about politics or diplomatics, but then I guess that honor could be extended to most in his administration.
    See guys, now that it happens in another country is when you see it is a weird thing.

    --

    If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    1. Re:This is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I could argue that the US president knows a similar amount about politics or diplomatics, but then I guess that honor could be extended to most in his administration.
      See guys, now that it happens in another country is when you see it is a weird thing.

      Did you say the same when a Senator with all of two years of experience in the US Senate and no actual leadership experience ever became President in 2008?

    2. Re:This is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, you don't have to be a lifetime Congressman/Senator to become a capable President. In fact I'd say it would be better if you were not part of the system - that's until we got one of the most useless people alive become president, someone whose only qualification is that he is not a politician, but fails at every other human metric...

    3. Re:This is new? by Crash+Dummy+Redux · · Score: 4, Informative

      That didn't stop Abraham Lincoln from running for President with a single two-year term in the House of Representatives.

    4. Re:This is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you say the same when a Senator with all of two years of experience in the US Senate and no actual leadership experience ever became President in 2008?

      That senator was a constitutional scholar who at least understood the limits on his authority and how government works.

      His great orange-ness? He knows none of this, and the stream of crooks and cronies he brings in who spend tax-payer money on stupid things and utterly fail to understand the function of the department they are heading would be a joke if it wasn't scary.

      What you have now is a bunch of rich assholes with no knowledge (or concern) about the law, the Constitution, or doing anything else but lining their own pockets.

      That 'drain the swamp' thing? There's so much shit in that swamp Shrek would be happy.

  2. He's just a businessman by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Funny

    He knows how to do business things. Sit at desks. Make calls. Write reports. Attend board meetings. Shake hands. Carry briefcases. All the business skills you need for general businessing.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re: He's just a businessman by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      "Deregate"!

    2. Re:He's just a businessman by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      No, by secretary.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Low-tech Japanese by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People shouldn't be all that surprised about it considering how despite outwardly being very high tech, the Japanese can be surprisingly low-tech in many regards.

    One good example of this is how email hasn't become as commonplace as it has in most of the developed world. No, people in Japan, particularly companies, instead chose to use fax machines to achieve the same tasks as it was still the 1980s. Another example is that the very old fashioned hierarchies within companies allows bosses to be exactly like this computer illiterate cyber security chief. While this may seem really odd to us westerners, it's perfectly normal over there.

    As for how someone so ill fitted for the job has been given said job, it's more to do with how jobs like his are first and foremost given out based on party affiliation rather than aptitude for the job or any kind of merit. It sort of makes you wonder if it was better that rather than having political appointees actually run government organizations like this, limit political appointees within them to oversight roles rather than active management.

    --
    "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    1. Re:Low-tech Japanese by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The same thing happens all the time in the UK. Important jobs are given out as rewards or to groom allies of the Prime Minister. The people in charge of stuff like education, the army, Wales and of course cybersecurity are normally completely unqualified and clueless. It's the job of the civil servants to explain everything to them and handle the detail.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Low-tech Japanese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The people in charge of stuff like education, the army, Wales and of course cybersecurity are normally completely unqualified and clueless

      Top be fair, having an incompetent supervise a bunch of sheep and gnomes isn't that tragic.

    3. Re:Low-tech Japanese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The same thing happens all the time in the UK. Important jobs are given out as rewards or to groom allies of the Prime Minister. The people in charge of stuff like education, the army, Wales and of course cybersecurity are normally completely unqualified and clueless. It's the job of the civil servants to explain everything to them and handle the detail.

      Isn't this just the modern day version of how things have worked in England since at least 1066?

    4. Re:Low-tech Japanese by fuzznutz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have my own experience about it. Unfortunately i can't tell you the details, but i can just say, the japs in this case are completely incapable to understand and follow a very simple protocol despite many different engineers and executives explaining it over >5 meetings. God damn, it pisses me off.

      I have a Japanese hybrid car, a Toyota. The engine, drivetrain and structural engineering are awesome. The user interface for all the electronics is the most gawdawful inane junk I have ever seen on a motor vehicle. Nothing makes any sense or is the least bit intuitive. It's clear their brains do not work the same way as ours.

      The GPS can't find half of the addresses that have existed for 50 years unless it matches one 2000 miles away. I updated the maps to fix that problem without any success. My $1,000 navigation system is not even in the same league as the $100 TomTom I bought ten years ago. Turning off the engine when you forget to put the transmission in park (I used to drive a stick) causes the car to lose it's damn mind. You have to restart it, place the lever in park and THEN turn it off again. If you are in a hurry and accidentally open the driver's door while pushing the off button, the steering wheel refuses to lock and the car incessantly beeps angrily at you even after you get out and close the door. You have to either climb back in, close the door and restart the car and turn it back off again or else press the door lock button on the fob to make it shut up. To start it you have to press the brake, then a green (Why green?) LED lights up on the start button. Then when you press that start button, the green LED turns off giving you no indication that the car is on. (It's a hybrid so the engine does not immediately fire up) There is absolutely nothing to indicate if the car is actually on or instead accidentally turned off since the lights and dash do not go dark for some time after the car is turned off. Who in their right mind would design a car so that the green LED on the on/off button would turn off when the car turns on?

      It's so bad, Microsoft could have designed it.

    5. Re:Low-tech Japanese by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I suppose it is the same in most places. Sometimes it can work out if the subject does not require too much understanding of the technicalities and the opinions of experts is either easy to vulgarize or very consensual. In many subjects where the politician is going to be showered by propaganda from various lobbies who can simulate expertise, it won't do and it can lead to catastrophes.

      If you read TFA, the guy is obviously a doofus. This is not his first.

      I grew up in a country (Belgium) where a big chunk of the public is hostile to the very notion of expertise. They perceive it as arrogance. So incompetence is not only tolerated but touted as a form of modesty or some kind of righteous revenge of the legitimate "people" against the abusive "elites". So kakistocracy is actually a thing.

      Of course, it must happen in many other countries. I just happen to know the one i grew up in.

    6. Re:Low-tech Japanese by twdorris · · Score: 2

      My son had a 2005 with no issue either. The GPS is indeed junk.

      Logic isn't your thing, is it?

    7. Re:Low-tech Japanese by fuzznutz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a Toyota Prius, their flagship Hybrid and I call your BS. My son had a 2005 with no issue either. The GPS is indeed junk. You can turn off the car without putting it in Park and it does that automatically. I have never seen that green power LED issue. on any of the 3 Prii I have experienced. The Speedometer goes dark immediately when turned off, in my experience.

      Mine is a 2008 Camry Hybrid and it is no BS. I have demonstrated to many people how awful the design is just because I could not believe how stupid it was. My speedo stays lit for some time after turning it off. The headlights stay lit too. I have gone inside the house all the way wondering if I forgot to turn the damn thing off because I see the lights are still on through the windows. I hit the lock on the keyfob and off go the lights. If it turn it off in park, the steering wheel locks. If it is out of park when it is turned off, the steering wheel is loose and the dash will never go dark... ever. Until you restart it, seat the gearshift lever and turn it back off again. The previous owner told me she left it on all night in the garage one time because she thought it was turned off when it wasn't.

      One friend has an Equinox and when it is off but the brake is applied the start button LED glows red. Once started, it goes green and stays on until it is turned back off again. NOW THAT MAKES SENSE.

    8. Re:Low-tech Japanese by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      It's not jealousy, it's resentment that the educated people have used their advantage to ruthlessly destroy the working class. Our elites don't just look down on the rural working class. They look down on urban working class and poor people as well. The term "ghetto" doesn't exactly describe small-town America.

      It's doubly offensive because, first of all, there's not a damn thing wrong with being a worker who lives in a trailer. I mean for chrissake, do we need to have the French Revolution all over again? Are people actually proud of being economic parasites who live off the sweat of others? And second of all, what kind of bigotry is it that can't get past a southern accent to appreciate someone's character and intellect and actual accomplishments? Weren't we supposed to be past all that superficial crap?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  4. Doesn't have to be that bad by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is much better than having someone who thinks he is a cybersecurity expert after blacklisting a website on his home router. That guy would not think it's safe to plug in a random USB stick in a nuclear power plant terminal because "of course the plant has a firewall".

    He at least KNOWS that he has to ask experts for technical questions. It's the half-knowledge that's most dangerous.

    --
    bickerdyke
    1. Re:Doesn't have to be that bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What are you talking about? You need a basic level grasp of things to make a decision after the input of experts. He seems to be nowhere near that level, and it is not the experts who will be called to decide things!

    2. Re:Doesn't have to be that bad by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's my thought, too. I've been teaching people to use computers for 20 years. It's pretty easy to show people what technology will let them do.

      What's a lot more difficult is to teach the thought process to recognize unsafe interactions that is necessary for a security expert. I can't easily teach someone to second-guess technical assumptions stated as facts. I can't easily teach someone to understand that nobody is trustworthy enough to have unaudited system privileges. I can't easily teach someone that security comes from work, not from progress.

      Sure, I can try to teach these things. I can lecture lots of students, and they might even learn a few of the concepts, but thinking from a security perspective is very different from the "just make it work" approach that engineers and sysadmins tend to follow. Give me an old businessman who understands how to manage people and processes to do the huge amounts of work needed to maintain security, and I can teach him the few technical details he'll need to make sense of the systems.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Doesn't have to be that bad by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don’t know the exact nature of his job, but if he’s just there to manage it’s probably not a big deal, but even if you’re wise enough to delegate to experts, what do you do when the experts disagree or don’t have good answer themselves. Maybe in that case it doesn’t matter as being clueless doesn’t leave you that much worse off, but it does make it harder for others to follow or implement if they’re not confident in it.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s just a paper pusher. If that’s the case it probably is better that he just smiles nicely and doesn’t screw things up for everyone working under him. Sure you could argue that it would be better still if a competent person were in his position, but if this position just exists for someone to make appearances and deliver speeches, you’re just wasting the competent person’s time.

  5. Not a first by bluegutang · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Robert Moses, who tore up a bunch of New York City neighborhoods to build freeways, never drove a car. (He had a chauffeur drive him everywhere)

  6. It's certainly odd... by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

    While I agree that it's odd, I'm not sure that it really matters. As long as he knows how to put qualified people in key positions, then that's all that really matters. How many of his predecessors had to actually code or do anything hands on while in that position? If they could, would it be a smart use of their time? And just how effective would they have been?

    Eisenhower was criticized in his day for delegating and not being hands on enough. But he was smart enough to put the right people in the right positions. History certainly judged him more favorably than his critics at the time.

    1. Re:It's certainly odd... by sfcat · · Score: 2

      How is he supposed to know who is qualified for the job if he doesn't even understand what the job is?

      No executive is an expert in every job of his subordinates.

      There must be some way for people to be good at judging competence in areas they themselves are not expert in. Because it happens all the time.

      I've heard this argument before and its 100% weapons grade BS. You are right that nobody can be an expert in anything. But you are forgetting about Dunning-Kruger where ability confers the ability to judge other's ability. How on earth could this computer illiterate possibly hope to be able to tell good cybersecurity from something that couldn't stop your average 15 yro?

      This is why the myth of a pure manager needs to die. Skill in management itself is maybe 30% of the job in management. The strategy, talent assessment, and organization is far more important and those things require knowledge of what your team will be doing. That's why nobody believes this guy will be at all good at this job. The excuses we offer as to why this might not be so bad are more a psychological self-preservation technique than anything.

      --
      "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
  7. How is this news? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most science ministers lack a science degree and there have certainly been some decidedly uneducated education ministers. Defence ministers have rarely served in the armed forces and we once had a Chancellor of the Exchequer who could not balance his credit card. Sadly, in a democracy, the only qualification for the job that counts is that you got more votes than anyone else and all this requires is that you look like less of a drooling idiot than the other people standing for election...and sometimes even that isn't true.

    1. Re:How is this news? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Many people thought that the alternative candidate was worse...

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:How is this news? by bickerdyke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's often overlooked in the rest of the world.

      Heck, a wig on a broomstick would have beaten both of them.

      --
      bickerdyke
    3. Re:How is this news? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It would be useful if he did use a computer though, just so that he could put in to practice the things his department recommends. No better way to see how practical they are and understand the issues that prevent computer security.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:How is this news? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

      Yes, but they usually have to get elected first to be in a position to be appointed. It is unusual for ministers, especially those in the cabinet, not to be elected MPs.

  8. Sounds good to me by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sounds like he is 100% perfect at cybersecurity. No devices, no compromises. :)

  9. Personal versus professional by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Most science ministers lack a science degree and there have certainly been some decidedly uneducated education ministers.

    We have both of those currently here in the US.

    Defence ministers have rarely served in the armed forces and we once had a Chancellor of the Exchequer who could not balance his credit card.

    Speaking as a certified accountant I can definitively say that the skill sets for personal finance and for corporate or government finance bear very little resemblance to each other so I'm not really sure what your point about the Chancellor of the Exchequer is. Just because someone is irresponsible in their personal finances doesn't mean they are incompetent or irresponsible with their professional responsibilities.

    And "balance his credit card"? I don't know anybody who actually reconciles (the proper term for it) their personal credit card statements in any great detail. Most people quickly glance over their statement for obvious incorrect charges and then call it a day. Companies reconcile their credit cards but individuals seldom do. I don't really see this as evidence of anything.

  10. I actually don't see a problem here ... by gordguide · · Score: 2

    It sounds strange to say, in 2018, that someone "has never used a computer", but there is some merit in the argument that an executive or high ranking government leader should be earning hundreds, maybe thousands, of dollars an hour to type letters and answer eMails. There are people who can do that for him or her, and probably should be doing that for him or her.

    A management job or even a government minister's job is not to do the work of his department or company himself. Maybe this particular minister achieved his non-governmental success by delegation, perhaps? And if he chooses his subordinates wisely, he can be perfectly effective.

    He should be judged on the merits of his department, not on whether he can touch type. If the Japanese Cyber Security ministry does good work, then he is doing a good job. If not, then he should be replaced. Whether he uses a computer or not is misrepresenting his duty as the skill set of a minimum wage employee at the lowest pay scale.

    1. Re:I actually don't see a problem here ... by rkordmaa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He doesn't even understand the purpose of the organization he is running, you can replace him with a monkey and get the same results.

  11. Re:So did you expect the minister to write the cod by Solandri · · Score: 2

    The vast majority of people are employees. During their lifetime, they never have (and never will) manage other people. Since they've never had to do it, they only difficulty they attribute to managing is the aspect of it that they see - being told what to do. So they assume all a manger has to do is tell people what to do. And since anyone could do that, therefore managers are useless drains on a company (or country).

    Once you've actually done the job of managing people, you realize just how asinine people can be, and how much work is involved in getting a group of people to work together smoothly. A good manager is worth their weight in gold. The difference in efficiency is enormous - like getting a group of people to clean a beach by assigning each one an equal sized strip parallel to the beach, vs everyone just wandering off in random directions. If he's good at managing and has competent advisors and sub-managers, he'll be fine.