Technology has little to nothing to do with the problems being (well, that should be) worked at a national level...think of cyber security (as a discipline) as the creation and maintenance of an environment in which infosec and other *sec's can be most sustainably effective at managing stakeholder (citizen, business, nation) risk. An awareness of and even expertise in the appropriate I/O links and dependencies between Tech and environment is critical, but most of those links don't require in depth tech expertise in and of themselves.
I would much rather have a solid abstract thinker who can effectively decompose the underlying drivers for a problem, structure them into solvable components, communicate what needs to be done, and then facilitate broadly incompatible interests toward common goals in that position.....than someone who is a coder. Both have traits in common, but one understands systems in terms of a scope broader than computers and let's others with more narrow expertise solve their bits of the problem. My $0.02 sent from the wilderness -ish On Aug 25, 2014 10:21 AM, "Richard Brooks" <[email protected]> wrote: > Lack of technical expertise is apparently a plus in the world > of federal cybersecurity: > > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/22/does-the-white-houses-cybersecurity-czar-need-to-be-a-coder-he-says-no/ > -- > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations > of list guidelines will get you moderated: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at > [email protected]. > >
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
