I GET IT ENOUGH

I don't really understand what this guy's talking about. But I've talked to enough people who would understand it to get it enough to know we'd better get our act together.

Comments

[marc]

Bottom line is, what is the point of developing new ways to collect intelligence if you can't analyze what you already have.

Lawmakers do not want to spend more money developing new ways to collect intelligence if they feel our intel services can't cope with what they collect already. Despite the fact that the bad guys are developing new ways to communicate.

I think Admiral Grace Hooper demonstrated it quite uniquely, when speaking before congress seeking additional funding, she was asked to demonstrate what she meant by a nanosecond. As I understand the story, Adm. Hooper produced two sets of rope. One very long one and one 12 inches. The short one indicated how far light could travel in a nanosecond and the longer one in one second. She got her funding.

[don]

I had the pleasure of attending an advanced computer forensic school in the early 80's, that Admiral Hopper gave a talk. At the end of the talk, she passed out short (16") pieces of phone wire. She called it her nano second wire.

Will always remember meeting her. Great lady.

[Chap]

The author of the article misses an important point in his discussion about signals geek stuff. Before WWII the Army and Navy were both powerful and both had intel systems. So a comprimise was reached: one service did the intel one day, and the other did it the next.

So the decoded and useful information got dropped between the two organizations, and we got schwacked.

If you have more than one office looking at something, or for something, then you will lose that something between the two offices. And if you split responsibility on a day-by-day basis, you lose the war--happened in Rome, happened here.

I think this may be as important as what the writer discusses.