Media/Journalism Cringe Megathread - Hot off the Presses

[Zachowon]

What part of ‘let the sky fall and justice be done’ didn’t you get? If the military had done its damn job we would not be here.

What job is that?

 

[S'task]

Sounds like the IT equivalent of shelling your own position to hit the enemy. Don't care, fire away. Also, I'm far, far more worried about what the government does with my data. A black hat hacker just robs me once.

I'm increasingly tired of government agencies holding the people of a country hostage to prevent measures to curtail their power and misdeeds. Let the sky fall and justice be done.

This won't cause the sky to fall or justice to be done.

This will also not prevent the Federal government from having your data. All this type of thing does is make it more likely that Black Hat hackers will steal your data.

In other words, it's not an OR scenario, it's an AND scenario. You're just cutting off your own nose to spite your face, you're not going to cause problems for the Feds, you're just causing problems for yourself...

 

[Zachowon]

This won't cause the sky to fall or justice to be done.

This will also not prevent the Federal government from having your data. All this type of thing does is make it more likely that Black Hat hackers will steal your data.

In other words, it's not an OR scenario, it's an AND scenario. You're just cutting off your own nose to spite your face, you're not going to cause problems for the Feds, you're just causing problems for yourself...

But you see, they shouldn't have our data and we should let it crash and burn so we can be free of government knowing everything!




/s

 

[DarthOne]

What job is that?

Not going along with the Deep State’s bullshit or backstabbing Trump over the Middle East.

 

[Wargamer08]

This won't cause the sky to fall or justice to be done.

This will also not prevent the Federal government from having your data. All this type of thing does is make it more likely that Black Hat hackers will steal your data.

In other words, it's not an OR scenario, it's an AND scenario. You're just cutting off your own nose to spite your face, you're not going to cause problems for the Feds, you're just causing problems for yourself...

Really, if we don't keep feeding the Federal agencies infinite unaudited money hackers will steal all our data?

Amazing, it's almost as if they are holding the country hostage.

 

[Bacle]

You guys really don't get it.

It's not "without these licenses the Federal government ceases working", it's "without these licenses and ongoing support the Federal government's IT infrastructure becomes more outdated and vulnerable to attack than it already is and your personal information will be stolen".

Look, the Federal Government will not stop doing business, it will continue to use whatever software it wants so the bureaucracy keeps moving. Microsoft doesn't have a kill switch where they can just turn off government computers that are no longer paying for their Windows license, the government doesn't ALLOW shit like that on their networks. The Federal government uses their own special forks off all the major software that is supposed to adhere to the government NIST standards, and an outside of their control killswitch is way outside those standards.

But you know what WOULD happen? Microsoft and the other companies will stop making patches for those government machines running Windows. Whatever big security loophole is found by Black Hat hackers... it won't be patched, and every Federal government computer could potentially be vulnerable. And here's the thing, it won't be the Federal government that suffers when data is lost, it will be CITIZENS. It will be YOUR private data, YOUR IRS files, YOUR Passport information that will be lost. YOU will be the ones facing the damage, and, because the government was cut off from continual support by their own law, you know what? They're NOT GOING TO BE ACCOUNTABLE for said data loss... because they were just following the law.

And I'm not kidding about how this works. I know how this works. This kind of stuff is LITERALLY MY JOB. I know how the State Department acted when huge amounts of the Passport processing software was out of date and no longer being supported by the providing companies... to say they didn't care and it was like pulling teeth to get them to update is an understatement...

Maybe the Fed gov should get it's shit together then.

Like, what you just admitted just makes the Fed gov look incompetent, lazy, and indifferent on a whole new level.

You've given us more reason to have contempt for the Fed gov, not less.

Edit: I mean, you've proved Boebert's point for her; we should have accountability in how gov IT is acting, or not acting, to the benefit of the US public.

 

[King Arts]

What job is that?

Defend America and it’s constitution from all threats foreign and DOMESTIC.

 

[Sobek]

The only thing Washington D.C. "deserves" is a goddamn 5mt nuke going off at the center of it

 

[Zachowon]

Defend America and it’s constitution from all threats foreign and DOMESTIC.

You do know that means not what you think it means.
It means we can be used to.
We arnt just going to stage a fucking coup

 

[Bacle]

You do know that means not what you think it means.
It means we can be used to.
We arnt just going to stage a fucking coup

And that is why the US military keep failing the domestic PR angle; the military/Milley already coup'd Trump, they just had the PR to play it off as something else.

 

[Zachowon]

And that is why the US military keep failing the domestic PR angle; the military/Milley already coup'd Trump, they just had the PR to play it off as something else.

How? The Secdef did it.
Milleybwas following his orders.
And I fucking hate milley, as does most of the military

 

[S'task]

Really, if we don't keep feeding the Federal agencies infinite unaudited money hackers will steal all our data?

Amazing, it's almost as if they are holding the country hostage.

Maybe, before you make a fool of yourself, go look at my original post:

Err... the practice of what? Sending Federal money to big tech companies? Or something else? I don't mean to be a nay-sayer because I like the audit bit, but the Federal government has contracts for major infrastructure that they use that's provided by Big Tech companies and that only those Big Tech companies can really provide... to say nothing of the general bog standard license agreements they pay for for using industry standard software like... Windows.

Note: my opposition is not to auditing the money, I'm all for that, it's to the hamfisted "no spending any money with Big Tech for a year" bit because it sounds so open ended as to have unintended consequences like preventing the Federal government from paying their perfectly normal software license fees for using software nobody objects to or would expect them not to use.

Maybe the Fed gov should get it's shit together then.

Like, what you just admitted just makes the Fed gov look incompetent, lazy, and indifferent on a whole new level.

You've given us more reason to have contempt for the Fed gov, not less.

Edit: I mean, you've proved Boebert's point for her; we should have accountability in how gov IT is acting, or not acting, to the benefit of the US public.

Bacle... congratulations, you've now caught up to me from twenty years ago... no wait, you're just catching up to the bog standard Fusionist Conservative position of Reagan. And, as I pointed out above, I am ALL FOR THE AUDITING. What I was expressing concern about was a hamfisted "no Fed money to Big Tech for a year" catch all because I, unlike you all apparently, understands what that actually means and the kind of risks that actually creates. It's not that I'm defending the Federal government, far from it, it should be audited, IT Security is not taken seriously, we've known that for decades that the Federal agencies care more about uptime than security (that's what led to the OPM data breech years back) and that culture has not really changed. However, just no longer spending money on things like continued support from Microsoft for Windows, Windows Servers, etc. doesn't do anything to punish the bureaucrats who created the problem, strikes an overly broad target considering this all originated due to concerns about collusion with Twitter and such, not Microsoft, Cisco, and other Big Tech infrastructure and software vendors, and create real risk for Citizen's Personal Information that is stupid to take.

 

[Cherico]

The only thing Washington D.C. "deserves" is a goddamn 5mt nuke going off at the center of it

There are some things in DC worth perserving like historical monuments and documents and some of the more entertaining homeless people.

 

[Bacle]

Maybe, before you make a fool of yourself, go look at my original post:



Note: my opposition is not to auditing the money, I'm all for that, it's to the hamfisted "no spending any money with Big Tech for a year" bit because it sounds so open ended as to have unintended consequences like preventing the Federal government from paying their perfectly normal software license fees for using software nobody objects to or would expect them not to use.


Bacle... congratulations, you've now caught up to me from twenty years ago... no wait, you're just catching up to the bog standard Fusionist Conservative position of Reagan. And, as I pointed out above, I am ALL FOR THE AUDITING. What I was expressing concern about was a hamfisted "no Fed money to Big Tech for a year" catch all because I, unlike you all apparently, understands what that actually means and the kind of risks that actually creates. It's not that I'm defending the Federal government, far from it, it should be audited, IT Security is not taken seriously, we've known that for decades that the Federal agencies care more about uptime than security (that's what led to the OPM data breech years back) and that culture has not really changed. However, just no longer spending money on things like continued support from Microsoft for Windows, Windows Servers, etc. doesn't do anything to punish the bureaucrats who created the problem, strikes an overly broad target considering this all originated due to concerns about collusion with Twitter and such, not Microsoft, Cisco, and other Big Tech infrastructure and software vendors, and create real risk for Citizen's Personal Information that is stupid to take.

Do you not consider it a conflict of interest if the gov is paying for products from companies at the same time it is investigating those companies, and their larger industries, for election interference and monopolistic practices?

Make Microsoft and co give you the updates for free till the investigation is done, if the updates cannot be avoided.

 

[Zachowon]

Do you not consider it a conflict of interest if the gov is paying for products from companies at the same time it is investigating those companies, and their larger industries, for election interference and monopolistic practices?

Make Microsoft and co give you the updates for free till the investigation is done, if the updates cannot be avoided.

How can we make them? They are a private company not owned by the gov

 

[Bacle]

How can we make them? They are a private company not owned by the gov

Same way immanent domain works, just with digital data.

Or the same way the gov can force train operators to keep working during national emergencies, despite shitty railroad company conditions.

 

[Zachowon]

Same way immanent domain works, just with digital data.

Or the same way the gov can force train operators to keep working during national emergencies, despite shitty railroad company conditions.

Uh...thay would be a horrible precident to set.

 

[Bacle]

Uh...thay would be a horrible precident to set.

It already exists, people know it, the people in DC just don't like to public to talk about it. Workers in vital national defense industries know they can be forced to work in national crisis's, and both you and @S'task have made clear just how critical fucking Microsoft Office shit is to the functionality of the US gov (insert Powerpoint meme's where you wish).

Milley and co coup'd Trump, the redline has already been crossed when it comes to military and civil control and accountability.

We live in clown world, at least I'm brave enough to admit it.

 

[Wargamer08]

Uh...thay would be a horrible precident to set.

Like I don't know breaking the strike of the air traffic controllers? That ship has sailed.

There is, purposely, no clean and easy way to pressure out of control Federal government agencies into cleaning up. It increasingly is a price that needs to be paid.

 

[S'task]

Do you not consider it a conflict of interest if the gov is paying for products from companies at the same time it is investigating those companies, and their larger industries, for election interference and monopolistic practices?

Make Microsoft and co give you the updates for free till the investigation is done, if the updates cannot be avoided.

Firstly, this is why the term "Big Tech" is so useless for this kind of thing.

AFAIK major Software and Hardware vendors are not accused of any of the censorship or collusion with the Federal Government like the Social Media companies are. We call them all "Big Tech" but Microsoft and Facebook are in two completely different industries that really don't ever compete with each other. Likewise, say, Cisco and Twitter are both part of Big Tech, but are so separated it's like treating a Steel Mill that provides railroad as part of the same industry that publishes pamphlets that are read on train trips. Yes you could say they both are part of "Big Transit", but are in such completely unrelated areas of the market they don't even intersect.

So basically, no, I don't consider it a conflict of interest since you're talking about unrelated corners of a overly broad industry term. Secondly, at that point you're effectively nationalizing the industry and while the Federal government CAN TRY, what you're proposing is going to then have considerable legal costs as the courts work out things (and it's not sure things will go the same way, the WW2 and Korean War era court cases regarding industry nationalization are not favored by the current Supreme Court), plus it causes potential long term issues with those companies who might take this as a sign that it would be better to not work with the Federal government and so may no longer bid on Federal contracts if the government is going to pull such shenanigans.

Like I have been consistently saying, as presented this has potential to be overly broad and have unintended consequences. "Big Tech" is a highly nebulous term that applies to sections of an industry that are only weakly connected.