Haft of the Spear

when it becomes a joke

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:19:46 -0600

When do people stop paying serious attention to a given issue? When "everything" is related to the issue:

The gas [NF3], widely used in the manufacture of flat screen TVs, is estimated to be 17,000 times as powerful as carbon dioxide.
Ironically, NF3 is not covered by the Kyoto protocol as it was only produced in tiny amounts when the treaty was signed in 1997.
Levels of this gas in the atmosphere have not been measured, but scientists say it is a concern and are calling for it to be included in any future emissions cutting agreement.

If its not TVs its cow farts. Tomorrow it will be my bar of Irish Spring. Just to be clear: I get it. Pollution = bad. I'm not down with pollution. I am as green as is practical and will be greener still once green tech gets up to speed. Looking at this from a "guy who studies and tries to help solve problems" angle, seriously, this ~~global warming~~ climate change business is getting ridiculous. A few decades ago when the plant was in danger of freezing solid, where was a proposal like this? In light of how successful the conglomeration that is DHS has been, what possible sense does such a move make? Fusion of hierarchies != improved capabilities. If serious people think this is a serious problem, then the best thing to do would be to STFU, seriously incentivize greenness, and watch the smart, effective solutions appear. Today's trend may show that life sucks for Denali owners, but I don't see a line backing up in front of the Metro dealership or hear about a run on Prius (Prii?). the more everyone flails about (especially true in intel or defense problems) the more questionable parties get involved in the process (as they glom on for the money, power or glory).

Domestic Intel: Now More Than Ever

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:13:02 -0600

Expect the normal hue and cry over this development, despite the common-sense nature at its core. That you would intentionally not take such factors into consideration (along with many others) is somewhat laughable given the stats. So they're recruiting whitey, OK, so you're going to ignore the tank in front of you because there is a sniper behind the tank? The issue is not that we shouldn't be asking such questions or considering such factors, it's that a man with a badge and a gun is doing the asking. I won't re-hash the issues the Bureau has long had WRT the intelligence business; suffice it to say that there are stronger bastions of capabilities that would most likely produce better results. That we are prohibited by law from turning those capabilities towards domestic threats leaves us with no alternative but to punt the mission to arguably the least capable entity. Good enough for gov't work I guess.

perfect timing

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:08:43 -0600

From Economist:

Mr Gates had the good fortune to be perfectly suited for his time—but he is less well-equipped for the collaborative and fragmented era of internet computing. This does not diminish his achievement. Nor, as some would have it, does his philanthropy necessarily magnify it. Whatever the corporate-social-responsibility gurus say, business is a force for good in itself: its most useful contribution to society is making profits and products. Philanthropy no more canonises the good businessman than it exculpates the bad. In spite of his flaws, Mr Gates is one of the good kind. Some great industrialists, like Henry Ford, stick around even as the world moves on and their powers fail. Mr Gates, pragmatic to the end, is leaving at the top.

As much as it might be needed, no purge of any hierarchy's long-since-useful staff is likely (aside from normal attrition of boomers with sufficient retirement savings). Those who resist the most (based on the angry finger-waving I get when I bring it up) are those that don't have their minds in the right place, a'la Bill G. In the end it isn't an argument about how successful any given individual or mission was, its about the kind of shift that is taking place all around that overwhelms individual will. I mean, no matter how much you might like the sound, there is a reason why REO Speedwagon is playing at the local country club and not Wolf Trap. Calls for reform aren't about malice or disrespect, they're about business. When you make it personal, that's when you end up causing the most damage.

so lazy and surly

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:51:31 -0600

I continue to be amazed at the level of effort put forth by a union on behalf of one of our Uncle's largest exempt workforces. I don't quite understand the motivation. I guess if you want to argue intel is more art than science, then sure, I'm down with joining the Teamsters (if nothing else for the jacket). Look unless you want to go to a seriously objective system of measuring performance, there is no system that is not going to be abused by unscrupulous SOBs. The union assumes however that every boss is an SOB, and I don't know about the rest of you, but that has rarely been my experience. In fact, more often than not I have seen bosses hampered by the performance/reward system and very deserving people effectively shortchanged because the rules were not flexible enough to account for the fact that they were rock stars. What the union doesn't want is a tech-based solution (the IC versions of Digg, Ebay and Amazon rankings) that would show objectively who was collaborating and having a measurable impact in the community (logs have no reason to lie). When measuring performance is simple math, you don't need to pay dues for an advocate.

navel gazing alert

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:49:56 -0600

That last post, was my 1,000th at HoTS (does not count everything I did at GroupIntel).

we'll see

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:47:36 -0600

Ostensibly, this should make it easier to get the right people in the right place in a timely manner (both for short and long-term arrangements). Now, if we can just fix the initial clearance issue and stop cannibalizing each other.

parallels

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:18:11 -0600

Done properly, this is how you could help resolve the who, what, when, where and how of Iraq, based on captured media. Of course the rush to forget is well underway, so breath holding is ill-advised.

the challenge

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:26:09 -0600

Inspired by Bob G's latest post (he gets all the cool trips), a challenge for all my peeps both in and out of the biz: 1. Based on all the free apps, plug ins, extensions, etc. you're aware of, build the baseline browser Alice and Bob analyst should have on their workstation (for the purposes of this evolution, the 'Net and 'Net-connected DBs is your simulated spooky info system). 2. Describe the killer plug-in, extension, etc. that doesn't exist yet but would make the job so much easier. Input to comments, please.

lower the unemployment numbers

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:48:25 -0600

Sys admins, DBAs, fellow geeks, lend me your talents:

incomplete thought

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:57:58 -0600

What if you organization (I’ve always got the IC on my mind, but any org will do) wasn’t a hierarchy, but a browser? A basic framework that provided some core capability/service (facility, access, connectivity, production, etc.) for all, yet open enough to allow one to add functionality as needed without dramatic effort (extensions, plug ins, add-ons). A basic principle for operation is in place (the –INT cycle) but each deliverable is produced using either established applications (trusted downloads) or a solution developed ad hoc. Success? Upload your solution for polishing and re-use by others. Failure? Disseminate what happened and a) avoid future failures or b) discover a previously unknown source that can make it work. Value derived from increased speed of delivery, more minds-on-task, and more granular/refined content (not to mention reduced overhead, inefficiency and bureaucracy). Trends with technology developments as well as workforce dynamics (demands for frequent challenges; measurable, instant feedback; and flexibility). Capable of adapting to new situations/problems/demands precisely because it lacks a rigid structure. Scalable from team to agency to community-level. IC-as-platform? (H/T to everyone I’ve talked to in the last week (you know who you are) about related issues. Just took me some time and a couple Sierra Nevadas to put it all down).

deeper than technology

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 09:48:38 -0600

As we try to figure out how to operate in and integrate the tools of the information age into the age-old practice of blowing things up, it is clear we have issues (H/T John):

Unfortunately, high-speed communications and bold initiative do not always go hand in hand. With such an abundance of information available simultaneously at all levels, micromanagement can creep unnoticed into the chain of command and pull it apart. For example, if a general is able to follow an ongoing firefight through email and IM, and he is inclined to believe he knows what's best for the units in contact, then he very well might start directing those small units from afar, consequently eliminating the need for his colonels, captains, and sergeants to do any thinking of their own.

as predicted

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:00:31 -0600

Don't think I can do a more succinct job than this. As I stated before, Intel isn't going to help solve climate change. Hell, Intel wasn't even used in the production of the report. Apparently the only reason it is classified at all is for international-political reasons ("Country X is run like Monty Burns' nuke plant" – or words to that effect). If you were going to develop a top-11 list of wasteful, political uses of Intel, this evolution would be in the top three, easy. Why use the IC instead of, say, the EPA? Well, science is OK, but secrets make everything better, right? Oh, wait … Climate change _may_ drive or exacerbate conflict; so could ethnic strife, political upheaval, or the shortage of some precious resource (not climate driven) . . . this is more or less the natural state of the world. If we were going to focus our nat-sec energies on the impact of climate change, a better use might to a study on how to best (re)configure our military and aid strategies and capabilities, etc., to deal with the resulting fall-out.

Book Review

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:12:55 -0600

Soldiers of Reason

subduing the echos of history

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:12:37 -0600

Sticking my toe in the waters of the CTLab.

money line

Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:27:49 -0600

It’s likely because Germans, like the French and Italians, ran out of patience with domestic terror groups years ago.

A recent line from another journalist (I forget whom at the moment) also applies: 'few people have seen a dead American soldier.' More broadly, few know one, period. 9/11 directly impacted few and the post-attack security measures are no different. I doubt it will change much if we are attacked again.