2015-07-08 9:08 GMT+09:00 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org>:

A "litmus test" issue might be whether you think the NSA's expressed surprise over Snowden's leaks was genuine. I tend to think it was, and that his documents are genuine. I see no reason for the NSA to be substantially more competent than, say, the OPM.

There's absolutely no reason to think the NSA doesn't have a layered/multi-cell operation wherein a mere contractor is not given access to nation-essential secrets. If there's a foreign spy you want him to penetrate what seems like a complete organisation. Why not give them what they want? There's lots of "more secure than FBI/CIA, less secure than 'we broke enigma' " work to be done, just put it in the public-facing independently operating organisation.

Would you publish "we broke enigma" in a memo to the intranet? NSA didn't. NSA wouldn't get worse at what they do.

The real headbreaker is when this is a problem. It's basically not a problem until you're a threat to the absolute fundamentals of what the NSA is designed to protect. And what's that? Is it personal freedom, the advancement of the human race, and the minimization of suffering? Is it the maximization of some abstract profit? The concentration of power? Do the latter two pretty much amount to the first?

Intelligence laundering is a serious issue, of course, but running a clean organization would make the laundering exceedingly hard.

They're each large organizations with no bottom line that attract people of flexible moral character who are attracted to power and/or job security.

I'm in Korea, I talked to a bunch of US soldiers stationed here. They're exceedingly good-hearted, well-intentioned, high-spirited guys. Many love their work, the tension, the seriousness and hone their performance for sport and need. The balance between trigger-happy and accident-adverse is delicate and they seem extensively coached to preserve the balance properly.

I've talked to some that like their state, but hate the FED. I've talked to some that think the US is bad but it's enemies are worse. I've talked to some that have doubts about parts of the US, about corruption, but believe in democracy such that they believe the US is a fundamental force of good.

The lesson is: very moral people still do very immoral things for many, sometimes excellent, reasons.

I don't think those traits tend to lead to effective organizations, as much as a number of Hollywood movies would like us to believe.

I think there's not much difference between organisations. Make sure people's motivations are sincere and that they put in the effort. There's apparently a serious issue with "human resource rot" where worse people get brought into orgs or people get unfocused or demotivated. Without a bottom line there's less penalty for it. Doesn't mean it will happen. Snowden sure shows a certain amount of rot in NSA_Public. The recent Trident leak shows that the UK's nuclear deterrent program is rotten to a ridiculous point, but seems to indicate the US does much better.

Who knows! ;)