And the nice thing about computers is that things change. And its amazing how long you can draw FOIA requests along. Those 2 factors are wonderful things for security. That and if it does expose a serious exploitable flaw, we dont have to release it.
Uninterested? Only until you accidentally step onto their turf (often when you are trying to make up for a deficiency on their part). Then they become very interested in making your life a living hell.
Why would you think that? This would be a great way to support that income source. Think about it, how often do governments cut taxes? Think of the milage tax as a good usage tax, and gas taxes as a good way to punish those wrongdoers who are still using inefficient cars.
Good luck in trying that and not taking a good chunk of the world down at the same time. If people thought the Great Depression of the 20's-30's was bad, imagine how bad it would be now with the massively interconnected economies of the world.
FOUO is not a security classification (its attached to unclassified information). The only acceptable security classification in the USG are C, S, and TS (there of course may be addendiums/kickers to those levels, like TS-SCI, but officially there are only 3) and Confidential is the lowest. I was simply commenting that to an AC comment, you may have not seen the what I was commenting to due to filters.
Look at one of the links higher in this topic. There is a reference to the origional removal of the FOUO qualification here. Trust me, if it wasn't there I would have the same issue (though my stuff deals with SBU, which is the same as FOUO).
Remember that they are married (which irregardless of the marriage penalty stuff means that they have entirely different ranges than a single person) and that they owned a house at the time (until you own one, and in most tech areas they expensive, you underestimate the tax advantage they bring to some thing that was simply an expense before). That and other deductions (like 401k plans) can really knock down a tax bill. BTW, in a number of areas in this country a couple making 130k is still considered to be middle class.
Yes it does. Internment camps would work. But you deliberately choose an inflammatory word that has loads of negative connotations. If you truly cannot tell the difference (both in scale and severity) then their really is no need for any further dialog, since you would be so deep into your dogmatic responses that its not worth the electrons to respond to you. BTW, most of the people being held down in Gitmo are a legal exception, not really covered by international law (as they were picked up in a war zone, fighting uniformed servicemen, without any corresponding uniform of their own. Which according to those beloved international laws of yours makes them illegal combatants, and they should thank their lucky stars that they are even alive.).
follow the logic of your position Ah your big mistake. Logic never seems to do all that well when it faces down Dogma. "Facts? I don't need no stinkin facts, because I know the Truth."
set up concentration camps on remote islands Pluuueeaaseee.. Have you ever seen footage of the end result of a real concentration camp? There wouldn't be a single inmate at a german or soviet concentration camp who wouldn't kill to be kept in an american "concentration camp". Lets see here, we feed them food that meets their dietary needs, provide access to their religion, and barely lay a hand on them. Compare that to being worked to death on a starvation diet or paying a visit to the showers.
I don't wonder because I simply don't care anymore. It's stuff like this that (where somehow the US is being blamed for frickin natural disaster deaths (where our governmental agencies tried to warn people)) makes me not care because some of you are lost causes. Apparently the US can do no right in pretty much anything we do (we are in the classic Catch 22 scenario, there seems to be no action that we can take on anything that will earn us anything but blame.).
I agree with you (as someone who spent 6 years in software development before heading over to the security side). It gives you perspective on the issues, an understanding of how the people you work with think, and it gives you a certain level of maturity and experience. I personally think of those who go straight for the security positions as people in business think of the kids who go straight for the MBA without any practical experience. Nobody in my floor full of computer security people started off with a with a focus for this field (hell, more than half of them never even started in the computer field.).
Just let it go.... The term has been associated so long with the citizens of the USA you just need to let it go (instead of trying to make up silly alternate names). The only people who seem to care about it are the Canadians and Mexicans, and if you ever called them an American they would be quick (almost tripping over themselves in their verbal defense) to point out where they are from.
assuming your clearance is with the DOD (and given the breakdown on who has the most cleared people most people have one with them) then simply go to this site and they will explain what to do.
here and here, a sublink
Heh, love the line right above the second link... We do not investigate unexplained phenomena
If you hold TS or higher(I know they claim there is nothing higher, but the kickers like SCI require a more in depth background investigation, so I think its a matter of semantics) one of the requirements is a being in the pool for random drug tests. I must say that I am suprised you got past adjucation with that attitude toward drug use. They tend to not like anything more than experiementation in the softer drugs (weed). When did you get your clearance? For anyone wondering why people get clearances denied, this site can give you a pretty good idea on the general reasons people are denied clearances.
Ah, that would be why they take somewhere around 2 years to get(based on my last experience)..... The two Secret level investigations that I have received have interviewed coworkers, neighbors, etc (for fun, if you ever get one, remember to file a FOIA action to get a copy, its pretty interesting, as well as being a good baseline for future re-ups/upgrades). At even the minimum they run Credit, NAC (National Agency Check) and LAC (Local Agency Check). The average right now is 12 months, and around 24 for TS+. It does tend to be higher for contractors than government employee's. And given that a lot of newer work is in the Terrorism/Intel field, that often requires the issuance of TS to work in that arena.
Dont forget Congress: Congress has formed a comittee to study the phenominon and will release a 1000 page report in 3 years detailing current theories.
Nah, they would never do that.....
Or he could be a boneheaded Beta Tester. We have seen a few of them show up here and directly or indirectly bragging about the capabilities that their box has that ours doesn't.
PS You now have a free timeslot there. LAX met the chopping axe a couple of weeks ago.
I imagine they are technically in "testing". But for them to actually be used in operations before their operational date marks a significant change in the way the way that the Pentagon is handling technology projects. We are seeing the military more open to fielding projects before they would be deployed in a conventional aquisition world, getting the new capabilities into the field quicker and hopefully making the warfighters life a little easier. The Air Force ones aren't the best example of that though, since the development time of major ACAT 1 & 2 systems is so long. A better example as I stated was the Army's RFI PMO, which uses a very short feedback loop to evaluate and deploy new technology to the field. A lot of time that tech is incremental changes to current capabilities, lighter, smaller tech or stuff that it didn't occur to provide the soldiers.
Milspec was dieing. Overall the military is heading to a COTS philosophy, in part because it has become increasingly hard to replace those milspec equipment, due to the accelerated pace of technology development. As a case for this, go look up things like the Army's RFI (Rapid Fielding Inititative) PMO. They are getting the latest equipment out to the field in the shortest time possible. Another good example would be the early introduction of the Global Hawk (which was still in testing/pre-production phase when it was deployed to the field) and the armed Predator varients. Or for example on Navy warships where the latests versions/refits are being provided technology that can be easily replaced as technology walks forward.
Now that said, there is still a fair amount of red tape, but it isn't as bad as it used to be.
How sure are you that we don't care about China? Just because you don't hear it in the news doesn't mean that it isn't a concern. It just means that the news people got bored with the whole thing and have moved on to something else (because modern news media sometimes reminds me of someone with ADD). With 1.2 billion or so people, a rapidly increasing need for world resources, a strong and agressively modernizing military, large ethnic groups in other countries (which make easy targets for espionage recruiting), and a strong technical base, I would bet a fair amount of money that China remains high on a number of planners minds.
Slashdot Mirror
And the nice thing about computers is that things change. And its amazing how long you can draw FOIA requests along. Those 2 factors are wonderful things for security. That and if it does expose a serious exploitable flaw, we dont have to release it.
Uninterested? Only until you accidentally step onto their turf (often when you are trying to make up for a deficiency on their part). Then they become very interested in making your life a living hell.
Why would you think that? This would be a great way to support that income source.
Think about it, how often do governments cut taxes? Think of the milage tax as a good usage tax, and gas taxes as a good way to punish those wrongdoers who are still using inefficient cars.
Good luck in trying that and not taking a good chunk of the world down at the same time. If people thought the Great Depression of the 20's-30's was bad, imagine how bad it would be now with the massively interconnected economies of the world.
FOUO is not a security classification (its attached to unclassified information). The only acceptable security classification in the USG are C, S, and TS (there of course may be addendiums/kickers to those levels, like TS-SCI, but officially there are only 3) and Confidential is the lowest. I was simply commenting that to an AC comment, you may have not seen the what I was commenting to due to filters.
You forgot "CONFIDENTIAL", the lowest level of the classification scheme.
Look at one of the links higher in this topic. There is a reference to the origional removal of the FOUO qualification here. Trust me, if it wasn't there I would have the same issue (though my stuff deals with SBU, which is the same as FOUO).
Remember that they are married (which irregardless of the marriage penalty stuff means that they have entirely different ranges than a single person) and that they owned a house at the time (until you own one, and in most tech areas they expensive, you underestimate the tax advantage they bring to some thing that was simply an expense before). That and other deductions (like 401k plans) can really knock down a tax bill.
BTW, in a number of areas in this country a couple making 130k is still considered to be middle class.
Yes it does. Internment camps would work. But you deliberately choose an inflammatory word that has loads of negative connotations. If you truly cannot tell the difference (both in scale and severity) then their really is no need for any further dialog, since you would be so deep into your dogmatic responses that its not worth the electrons to respond to you.
BTW, most of the people being held down in Gitmo are a legal exception, not really covered by international law (as they were picked up in a war zone, fighting uniformed servicemen, without any corresponding uniform of their own. Which according to those beloved international laws of yours makes them illegal combatants, and they should thank their lucky stars that they are even alive.).
follow the logic of your position
Ah your big mistake. Logic never seems to do all that well when it faces down Dogma. "Facts? I don't need no stinkin facts, because I know the Truth."
set up concentration camps on remote islands
Pluuueeaaseee.. Have you ever seen footage of the end result of a real concentration camp? There wouldn't be a single inmate at a german or soviet concentration camp who wouldn't kill to be kept in an american "concentration camp". Lets see here, we feed them food that meets their dietary needs, provide access to their religion, and barely lay a hand on them. Compare that to being worked to death on a starvation diet or paying a visit to the showers.
I don't wonder because I simply don't care anymore. It's stuff like this that (where somehow the US is being blamed for frickin natural disaster deaths (where our governmental agencies tried to warn people)) makes me not care because some of you are lost causes. Apparently the US can do no right in pretty much anything we do (we are in the classic Catch 22 scenario, there seems to be no action that we can take on anything that will earn us anything but blame.).
I agree with you (as someone who spent 6 years in software development before heading over to the security side). It gives you perspective on the issues, an understanding of how the people you work with think, and it gives you a certain level of maturity and experience. I personally think of those who go straight for the security positions as people in business think of the kids who go straight for the MBA without any practical experience. Nobody in my floor full of computer security people started off with a with a focus for this field (hell, more than half of them never even started in the computer field.).
Just let it go.... The term has been associated so long with the citizens of the USA you just need to let it go (instead of trying to make up silly alternate names). The only people who seem to care about it are the Canadians and Mexicans, and if you ever called them an American they would be quick (almost tripping over themselves in their verbal defense) to point out where they are from.
assuming your clearance is with the DOD (and given the breakdown on who has the most cleared people most people have one with them) then simply go to this site and they will explain what to do.
here
and here, a sublink
Heh, love the line right above the second link... We do not investigate unexplained phenomena
If you hold TS or higher(I know they claim there is nothing higher, but the kickers like SCI require a more in depth background investigation, so I think its a matter of semantics) one of the requirements is a being in the pool for random drug tests.
I must say that I am suprised you got past adjucation with that attitude toward drug use. They tend to not like anything more than experiementation in the softer drugs (weed). When did you get your clearance?
For anyone wondering why people get clearances denied, this site can give you a pretty good idea on the general reasons people are denied clearances.
Ah, that would be why they take somewhere around 2 years to get(based on my last experience)..... The two Secret level investigations that I have received have interviewed coworkers, neighbors, etc (for fun, if you ever get one, remember to file a FOIA action to get a copy, its pretty interesting, as well as being a good baseline for future re-ups/upgrades). At even the minimum they run Credit, NAC (National Agency Check) and LAC (Local Agency Check). The average right now is 12 months, and around 24 for TS+. It does tend to be higher for contractors than government employee's.
And given that a lot of newer work is in the Terrorism/Intel field, that often requires the issuance of TS to work in that arena.
Dont forget Congress: Congress has formed a comittee to study the phenominon and will release a 1000 page report in 3 years detailing current theories.
Nah, they would never do that.....
They do have to get past the encryption on the card first though. And we are talking about the DOD, its not like they aren't paranoid or anything.
Or he could be a boneheaded Beta Tester. We have seen a few of them show up here and directly or indirectly bragging about the capabilities that their box has that ours doesn't.
PS You now have a free timeslot there. LAX met the chopping axe a couple of weeks ago.
I imagine they are technically in "testing". But for them to actually be used in operations before their operational date marks a significant change in the way the way that the Pentagon is handling technology projects. We are seeing the military more open to fielding projects before they would be deployed in a conventional aquisition world, getting the new capabilities into the field quicker and hopefully making the warfighters life a little easier.
The Air Force ones aren't the best example of that though, since the development time of major ACAT 1 & 2 systems is so long. A better example as I stated was the Army's RFI PMO, which uses a very short feedback loop to evaluate and deploy new technology to the field. A lot of time that tech is incremental changes to current capabilities, lighter, smaller tech or stuff that it didn't occur to provide the soldiers.
Milspec was dieing. Overall the military is heading to a COTS philosophy, in part because it has become increasingly hard to replace those milspec equipment, due to the accelerated pace of technology development. As a case for this, go look up things like the Army's RFI (Rapid Fielding Inititative) PMO. They are getting the latest equipment out to the field in the shortest time possible. Another good example would be the early introduction of the Global Hawk (which was still in testing/pre-production phase when it was deployed to the field) and the armed Predator varients. Or for example on Navy warships where the latests versions/refits are being provided technology that can be easily replaced as technology walks forward.
Now that said, there is still a fair amount of red tape, but it isn't as bad as it used to be.
uncle sam.....
Sorry but, "Freedom of Speech" != "Freedom of Responsibility"
How sure are you that we don't care about China? Just because you don't hear it in the news doesn't mean that it isn't a concern. It just means that the news people got bored with the whole thing and have moved on to something else (because modern news media sometimes reminds me of someone with ADD). With 1.2 billion or so people, a rapidly increasing need for world resources, a strong and agressively modernizing military, large ethnic groups in other countries (which make easy targets for espionage recruiting), and a strong technical base, I would bet a fair amount of money that China remains high on a number of planners minds.