Maybe stop hiring based on whether people use or used drugs?
In the tech world drug users, particularly of hallucinogens, probably make up the top 10%.
Obviously this is anecdotal, but of my friends in tech (early to late 20s) I’m the only one who has not used hallucinogens or psychedelics. I don’t think a single one of their salaries (not TC) are under $150k.
Isn’t that more on the artsy side of tech?
No. The majority are taking federally illegal drugs in some capacity.
73% have taken weed in some form in the past year according to a quick Google search compared to 43% of Americans. The California bay area (tech capital of the world) is also very open minded to drugs. I’ve been to many parties here with people openly using cocaine, shrooms, molly, and acid. Never felt unsafe or concerned for anyone because even at large parties (500+ people) people are always looking out for others and keeping everyone safe.
I honestly didn’t believe recreational cocaine use was a thing until moving here and it absolutely blew my mind. I’ll personally never touch it, but to each their own.
Yeah, honestly this shit is why I have avoided government jobs. I’m not really a drug user… just don’t like idea that I need to disclose the exact date and time of every time I ever did use one. Also, the pay sucks. So, the options are jump through hoops and have the government audit your personal life, or don’t and get paid more for that decision.
Republicans hate the government and government workers though, so they don’t even care that this policy costs the US Government talent.
How in the world is someone supposed to remember each and every time they smoked a bowl?? Shit I can barely remember what I had for lunch yesterday, and I don’t really smoke much anymore.
Thats not something they ask. It’s “have you used these drugs, in this time frame” Yes is a no go. But they do ask you to recount every job you have ever held, who your friends were each year and where you lived your whole life.
Even more so… Maybe stop requiring ridiculously formal attire?
I wouldn’t go as far as moreso but yes!
I work in exactly this field and I can go to work in shorts and a tank top because it’s about my expertise, not the material or its form I choose to wear. I had to go to work in a suit in a previous job and I’ll never ever accept that again.
To an extent, I can understand not wanting to hire someone if they have an active substance dependency issue, especially for mission critical government work. But why are we still chastising people that had a bit too much fun in college?
I understand that the US is likely vulnerable to cyber attack, but is a widespread attack by China likely in the immediate future?
I mean, let’s say China does disable infrastructure, banking, etc in a coordinated and widespread attack. But then what? An attack on that scale is an act of war, and I doubt China would be willing to follow up with military action at this time.
Perhaps this is more of a preventive MAD type strategy? Essentially a warning to the US to not mess with China, or else these are the consequences.
Given trade, it doesn’t seem to be in their best interest to cripple the US.
Let us face squarely the paradox that the world which goes to war is a world, usually genuinely desiring peace. War is the outcome, not mainly of evil intentions, but on the whole of good intentions which miscarry or are frustrated. It is made not usually by evil men knowing themselves to be wrong, but is the outcome of policies pursued by good men usually passionately convinced that they are right.
—Norman Angell, author of The Great Illusion
I think a lot of American planners expect the next war to be against China more than Russia, most likely as part of efforts to reclaim Taiwan militarily. Whether that actually happens or not, China seems to be trying to build a military that can win against the U.S., either by matching strengths or some more asymmetric means. I think I saw a story recently that China was constructing mockups of American navy ships in a desert that seem to be for war gaming, as an example.
Had a long talk with a very intelligent, young, Navy SIGINT guy last New Years. He’s been out there, intercepting and working on signal intelligence. Basically said, “China is the enemy, and they’re far more able and serious than you think. Can’t say much more, take it or leave it.”
China is still mostly poor and rural. For all of their economic expansion things are still basic there for most people.
If 75% of China’s population is poor and rural, that other 25% is still higher than USA’s population, which also includes poor and rural people.
That’s debatable, but that doesn’t have much bearing on China’s military capabilities. Their urban canters are very much developed. You could also say that much of the US is rural and poor, while our military has been involving themselves all over the world for a long time.
Well a powerful economic base is the foundation of a superpower. The US leans on General Dynamics, Raytheon, countless contractors, etc. China has no base as extensive as that.
Idk if Taiwan would be worth the war, at least not more than supplying Ukraine who’s fighting Russia, which has done way more damage to our country recently. We need to catch up on our local chip manufacturing capabilities fast first, though.
Right after they had that Asia pacific summit in SF, suddenly there was very little news about threats to Taiwan, and there was a lot of news about new chip manufacturing setting up in like Arizona and Utah or something. Which makes me think we are going to let China take Taiwan.
I can’t blame China for wanting Taiwan back. Imagine if we had a civil war and a foreign military invaded and occupied Alaska during a war just before it. Then at the end of the war one side fled to Alaska and declared it independant but we couldn’t retake it because we were so debilitated from the civil war and the war before it. Now a foreign government steps in and says you can’t retake your territory because they said so. I’d be pissed too.
But what do the residents of Alaska have to say? Are they doing fine? Would they be doing better if they were back under US?
Well the Japanese took Taiwan from China and then the nationalists fled China and took it over during the handover. No one asked the Chinese natives originally there if they wanted to separate from China.
We fought a civil war to keep the nation together.
IMO it wasn’t a good reason to fight a civil war. Fighting to force the south to end slavery was a good reason. Or because the south attacked the north because what it really wanted was to force the north to obey their laws about returning slaves rather than just secede and do their separate thing.
But the whole “you belong to us, like it or not” attitude is just imperialistic evil whether done by the USA or China. Or Russia or Israel.
Like if Texas seceded, the only military intervention I’d agree with is one that ensures those who don’t want to be a part of separatist Texas have free passage out and support for areas that want to secede from the independent Texas (and both of those are under the assumption that Texas is gonna Texas and try to oppress/put down those people instead of let them do their thing). And there would probably need to be some kind of treaty that figures out how to handle the federal stuff in Texas and it would be incredibly complicated, but I don’t think “it’s complicated” is a good justification to civil war them into staying because it’s already there.
No one asked the Chinese natives originally there if they wanted to separate from China.
Ok, but has anyone asked them anything now?
Well, while I understand them wanting it back with that context, it’s also been long enough that it feels like there’s no point or at least not worth the trouble for them, either lol. I’m just anti-war on all fronts. It’s just, idk, why at this point? National pride? It’s not like the have a ton of resources, like oil like Alaska does, do they? Just the tech sector, and China could probably catch up on chip manufacturing part of that in time or just get them through trade.
But maybe people’s grandparents can still probably remember when they were united and we need more time. Plus, I know they can get pretty nationalistic over there, too. I’m sure the US would try to take Hawaii in 50 years of whatever if a foreign country helped them separate from us, even though I’d like to think if they didn’t want to rejoin, we wouldn’t. But who knows, I’ve seen our right-wing in power 🙄
If you look at a map of China and the Pacific you can see that the “first island chain” of US allies totally surrounds China. From their military and strategic point of view they are being contained.
Now if China were to control the island of Taiwan they would break that containment. It’s very likely they care more about the strategic position rather than whatever it is they say about wanting to reunite with the Taiwanese. They don’t give a shit about the Taiwanese, they just want the island.
Ah, I didn’t even think about it in geographic sense. Makes total sense. And ya, the people in power never care about that petty shit like national unity, it’s just what they use to get the country on board with the next war or whatever, so with hindsight not sure why I went down that tangent lol.
The US wants a fight with China to justify our perpetual military buildup and foreign reach.
No, it’s not likely at all unless we get into an open conflict. Then cyber warfare will be just one arena of conflict. But I think most estimates are that that would be disastrous for us, china and the world so it’s unlikely for now.
It’s way more likely that the fbi want more money or are repeating some talking point to push an agenda or as a political favor.
That being said, if America ever plunges into a civil war it would be the best time for them to cripple the US infrastructure and do anything they want to Taiwan and SEA while having the US consumed in an infighting.
Isnt it about being prepared for if they are in a state of war?
That’s what it seems like to me. I don’t see China executing a cyber attack without being willing and able to follow up with military action. Preparation, as you said.
Tensions don’t seem high enough currently for that to be the case, but perhaps someday they will be. At that point we’d be facing an all out war.
Tensions can flair up any moment over anything, so while it might seem unlikely today all it takes is one Serbian guy with a gun to start a world war.
Whereas training hackers can take years, so start early.
I cant see China starting shit while Russia is failing so poorly and Irans limited in its capabilities. I assume the idea is to create regional instability for the next decade or two and try to push the US to its limits. Although Japan entered the war when it knew it wasnt ready, hoping on a hail mary strike to nullify Us capabilities, so don’t discount prideful stupidity speeding that up.
I don’t see China executing a cyber attack without being willing and able to follow up with military action. Preparation, as you said.
That ship sailed years ago. No one is even keeping up a polite “might be someone else” fiction anymore.
I guess my comment was a bit vague. China is certainly currently interfering with our systems on a smaller scale. I was referring to a large scale, widespread cyber attack as described in the article.
It’s highly likely China is capable of of that sort of attack. But I don’t see how we’re more at risk of that happening now than any other military action.
Another commenter described it well as another theater of a potential war, not necessarily that a war is imminent at this point
Why would they want to push a massive cyber warfare if they can hack and collect as much information as they want to push communism all over the world(that’s the purpose of intelligence work), I mean it’s not what about Huawei and TikTok are hated in the US?
All it’s just about pushing a certain agenda.
You don’t need to be a genius to realize WWIII it’s not about China vs US, it’s about Communism(socialism) vs fascism(elite) as always have been.
Do you know anything about cyber security or are just passionate because you get to talk about war. If China were to coordinate an widespread attack, do you think it is as simple as the attack will come straight from the computer in the CCP headquarters and you go in to save the day?
Do you have any idea of how many outdated, unsecured, vulnerable devices (most of them made in China) could be used around the world just to have a plausible deniability. Ever heard of phishing? It could have come from your friend’s email and you could be the one that’s spreading the worm. And it would take months to trace it back to China. These are not script kiddies you see on the movies.
Start Air gaping critical infrastructure from the internet instead of dreaming about hypothetical wars.
Did you reply to the wrong comment? I don’t think my comment is really related the points you’ve brought up.
I think the point they were trying to make was that China would have plausible deniablity based on where the attacks could be initially traced to.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
America always needs a boogeyman. Maybe having all infrastructure connected to the internet and letting security sloppy contractors open access isn’t a good idea either.
Meanwhile US citizens go without healthcare.
This is it. This headline has been true since 2009.
Here we go again… Point the finger at other countries while spying massively on the entire world.
I mean, yeah, I get that the US isn’t blameless across the board—or at all—but you’re drawing lines between two disparate things. Yes, spying is bad. We are agreed. Yes, the US is in deep with it. But what does that have to do with vulnerable infrastructure?
That’s like saying, “how can you sit there and tell me not to burn your house down when you stalk your ex girlfriend?”
Like….both are wrong. But they’re just not 1:1
Every cyber security and software dev that got fired over the past year: fucking sick, where do we sign up.
Maybe requiring computer nerds to not smoke weed if they want to work for Uncle Sam isn’t the best national security strategy.
The devil’s lettuce?! In my Christian Minecraft server?
They recently reduced requirements for gov cyber security roles.
I’m oblivious but I’m going to guess it was the technical skills requirements
Maybe not being the same asshole that always cries that there aren’t enough back doors in encryption if he is so worried about hackers.
I know a lot of people interested in infosec, but none of them want to be cops/feds.
Removing those draconic entry requirements would be a start.
…now give us billions please kthanks
What’s the pop ratio us vs China? Ball park 400mil vs 1.4 bil?
That’s like us is 30% just for an easy number.
So there’s like 1 us people to 3 or 4 China people.
And somehow this sector is 1 to 50. That’s wild.
Most people I know barely know how to use excel and they’d die before leaning xlookup. Let alone Kali or something to run some ops.
I know a little about this world. Uncle in the Navy communications side. They have programs for this stuff. Marines can pick their field or whatever and they have a program too. Seems like a pretty simple fix to make those orders pay better if they really need bodies.
Seems like some wild numbers to throw around. Like 50 to 1 feels a little China outnumber us type xenophobic.
“To quantify what we’re up against, the PRC has a bigger hacking program than that of every major nation combined,” the FBI director said.
“In fact, if you took every single one of the FBI cyber agents and intelligence analysts and focus them exclusively on the China threat, China’s hackers would still outnumber FBI cyber personnel by at least 50-to1.”
Manually attacking your adversary is so 1900s. Train a MASSIVE ai on every classified hacking methodology/procedure document in existence, give it the adversary’s IP ?range, and press GO.
Hacking is too complex to be automated like that - for now at least. Especially the AI buzzword is useless in this context. There are a lot of attempts to automate the process, but none of them come close to manual review by an experienced professional.
Even if only one in a million succeed, it’s still able to try those million damn fast. And it’s only going to get better logarithmically.
That would just cause chaos. Which might benefit the attacker but I think you’d be better off with smaller targeted strikes using the secret catalog of CIA/NSA hacking tools already available to them. Or I suppose why not do both.
Maybe we should continue to be friends. 😉
deleted by creator
“I need more money, cheers.”
Death to China, death to the east. Nuke china and the genocidal sycophant Xi.
(Inverse hexbear strategy)
