So don't use an e-mail filter, Linus. Change how you think about other people.
Yes, they are utter and complete morons. But that doesn't mean they can't be useful tools, and that dumping them in the trash is giving you the most you can get from them.
A bad manager blames his resources for poor results.
A good manager finds ways to use flawed resources.
A great manager finds ways to improve them.
I've worked for all three types. It looks like Linus has decided to go from Type II to Type II. Good for him -- he's been a very good model already on how to handle the mechanics of producing quality software, but active cultivation is the next step up.
Personal note: Linus' youngest is now 18 and I presume headed away from home. Funny how being the parent of adult children can change you (/me looks over shoulders...)
And about to get better.
Linus has been in denial for the last 20 years as to what his job is. However good he is as a cowboy coder, his essential role is management, and that requires people skills.
Which he admits to needing improvement.
Apparently some disapprove of his judgment on that front.
How much leverage is the Pentagon going to have at budget time by telling the public, "Support Our Troops" when those troops don't bleed anything but hydraulic fluid?
Does the employer pay severance when they terminate an employee? For how long? I've worked for firms that gave a week of severance for every year of seniority -- and the troops returned the favor with a week of notice for each week of severance.
I've also worked for places where they came up to you at your desk at 14:30 and handed you your final pay calculated to 14:30 of that day. Sometimes people just didn't come back from lunch, and none of us were surprised.
I'm not sure whose authority you'd normally need to move classified data around, but that's sort of irrelevant for her case; she didn't have permission from anyone to set up her server.
Who would have the authority to give her permission?
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officerâ"
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Which hinges upon (among other things) the highlighted phrases.
Who decides what is the "proper place of custody?"
I have gone to more than a few training sessions telling me that and signed more than a few declarations stating I understand that not treating classified information in accordance with the following rules (X Y Z), is illegal and you *may* be prosecuted with fines and prison time for violating those rules (because there is a law forbidding it).
Laws are made by Congress, that's easy. The fun part is the "rules," which are made by someone higher up in the organization. They're basically a codified version of "your boss says..."
So who makes the rules that the Secretary of State has to follow?
Under 18 U.S. Code 1924. She also violated several portions of the CFR, which generally wouldn't carry a possibility of prison, but would justify fines and loss of security clearance.
OK, so here's the cited USC, with undefined portions highlighted:
(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(c) In this section, the term âoeclassified information of the United Statesâ means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.
The passive voice tends to hide the fact that "has been classified" dodges the question of whose authority (Congress, the President, the Director of the CIA, the Director of the NSA, the Secretary of the Interior, the head of the Forest Service etc.) did the classification. However, it's patently silly to give a low-level clerk the power to render the President of the United States in violation of the law so there has to be more than passive voice involved somehow.
So, for instance, how do the highlighted "authorizations" and "determinations" happen?
As a current DoD employee, I currently sit through several hours of 'trianing' each year, that I must sign a legal document stating I saw it, that tells me that if I do ANY government business over personal email, that I am liable and breaking the law, that I will be fired, and then prosecuted.
Are you saying that Obama could be prosecuted for using the famous Blackberry?
That doesn't change the fact that what she did was a violation of the rules that *could* have been used to support an indictment if the government wanted to indict her.
Such as? Bearing in mind the difference between "rules" and "laws."
I realize that this is repetitious, but so far nobody has even tried to identify one stronger than "violating Departmental policy."
She wasn't caught downloading other peoples classified material (navy reservist),or hiding other peoples classified material in her garage (nishimura), or crazy cyber stalking love triangles (patreaus).
Actually, Petreaus gave his mistress (a journalist) copies of classified materials for her use in her work.
The adultery got the headlines, but the security violation was what led to his resigning.
Slashdot Mirror
For some value of "never," anyway.
A bad manager blames his resources for poor results. A good manager finds ways to use flawed resources. A great manager finds ways to improve them. I've worked for all three types. It looks like Linus has decided to go from Type II to Type II. Good for him -- he's been a very good model already on how to handle the mechanics of producing quality software, but active cultivation is the next step up. Personal note: Linus' youngest is now 18 and I presume headed away from home. Funny how being the parent of adult children can change you (/me looks over shoulders ...)
You're halfway right.
For some people, persecution fantasies are as close as they can get to being important. Be nice to them.
And about to get better. Linus has been in denial for the last 20 years as to what his job is. However good he is as a cowboy coder, his essential role is management, and that requires people skills. Which he admits to needing improvement. Apparently some disapprove of his judgment on that front.
named 'Glendower?'
/etc/portage/package.use is your friend.
Nope. Never bothered with systemd. Can't really claim foresight, just never felt like rebuilding all that plumbing.
Someone who wasn't going to vote anyway, but this makes a better excuse than "Luke Cage is on."
I would have figured Win98 or maybe WinME.
Now that Oracle has figured out how to keep anyone from doing this without paying them, how much will they charge?
Lesbians have the lowest STD rates of any adult demographic.
How much leverage is the Pentagon going to have at budget time by telling the public, "Support Our Troops" when those troops don't bleed anything but hydraulic fluid?
If the party who would have given permission was one of her subordinates, how would that work?
Who would be in charge of the panel?
Does the employer pay severance when they terminate an employee? For how long? I've worked for firms that gave a week of severance for every year of seniority -- and the troops returned the favor with a week of notice for each week of severance.
I've also worked for places where they came up to you at your desk at 14:30 and handed you your final pay calculated to 14:30 of that day. Sometimes people just didn't come back from lunch, and none of us were surprised.
Who would have the authority to give her permission?
Laws are made by Congress, that's easy. The fun part is the "rules," which are made by someone higher up in the organization. They're basically a codified version of "your boss says ..."
So who makes the rules that the Secretary of State has to follow?
OK, so here's the cited USC, with undefined portions highlighted:
The passive voice tends to hide the fact that "has been classified" dodges the question of whose authority (Congress, the President, the Director of the CIA, the Director of the NSA, the Secretary of the Interior, the head of the Forest Service etc.) did the classification. However, it's patently silly to give a low-level clerk the power to render the President of the United States in violation of the law so there has to be more than passive voice involved somehow. So, for instance, how do the highlighted "authorizations" and "determinations" happen?
Such as? Bearing in mind the difference between "rules" and "laws."
I realize that this is repetitious, but so far nobody has even tried to identify one stronger than "violating Departmental policy."
Under which statute? Note that there is a difference between violating State Department policy and violating statutory law.
Actually, Petreaus gave his mistress (a journalist) copies of classified materials for her use in her work.
The adultery got the headlines, but the security violation was what led to his resigning.
Maybe you can tell me -- what law did she violate?
I realize that there's a lot of general ickitude, but nobody I've asked seems to be able to identify an actual prosecutable statute.