White House Cybersecurity Boss -- Who Argued Against Overhyping Threats -- Resigns
from the too-bad dept
There's been a lot of attention lately on various "cybersecurity" bills making their way through Congress, and the White House's role in the debate has been pretty important. So it's interesting to see that the White House's cybersecurity czar, Howard Schmidt, has announced that he's resigning. While I don't always agree with Schmidt, he was one of the few (perhaps only?) high level government officials talking about online security issues who seemed willing to avoid hyperbole. In fact, he actually hit back against those who kept talking about "cyberwar," saying there was no such thing and it was "a terrible concept." One hopes that his successor, Michael Daniel, will be similarly willing to push back against the rush of hype around "cybersecurity."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cispa, cybersecurity, howard schmidt, michael daniel, white house
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Forced out?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Forced out?
Dr. King publicly opposed the war and help raise awareness to its human and financial cost...........yet he pissed off the "Machine".
Summary: Piss off the War (any kind of war) Machine, you get dismissed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not good
I truly hope I'm wrong, but the signs for Michael Daniel being as moderate as Howard are very slim IMO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not good
Is this a real loss? Not if "the money" is where they've always been.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It makes me want to puke that people can be so f***king stupid.
It has about as much to do with reality as the moon being made of green cheese.
If you use the term "cyber" anything you are either a scaremonger with an agenda or a complete utter dumb fool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
William Gibson is a sad panda :(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Doubtful
That's doubtful. Slowly but surely they're getting rid of all the voices that oppose the White House's socialist agenda. No doubt the administration made things so hard on Howard Schmidt because of his stance and they intend to control Michael Daniel with a clentched fist. He'll fall to the regime that will eventually lead to the US becoming socialist and it's people so tightly controlled that nobody will have any privacy even in their own homes and minds, and every American will be forced to have a camera in every corner in their house and pointed at their beds to make sure they aren't terrorists. Every trip starts with the first step, and censorship/slavery is where it all starts.
... Is it a conspiracy theory if they really are out to do it??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Doubtful
If you were to say fascist, well then sir, I would agree with you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
Communism is what happens when the capitalistic forms are removed. It is government taking direct control of the market and has always been oppressive in all iterations where it remains pure.
Capitalism is what happens when governments remain entirely separated from companies. It is the license for a company to do whatever it desires with its workers and has always been oppressive in all iterations where it remains pure.
Mercantilism is what happens when governments work for the benefit of companies. It consists of monopolistic policies and similarly drives oppression through imperialism.
Fascism is the result of militarizing the economic sector. Like mercantilism, it is imperialistic and a drives oppression in this manner.
We are currently dealing with a government that corrupts towards Mercantilism and Fascism. Note that this is not driven by conspiratorial forces, but rather by the nature of a quick buck. The presence of and legality of unions pressures against pure capitalism and hold-over from extensive propaganda campaigns pressures against pure communism.
Anti-fascist sentiments run stronger than anti-mercantilist sentiments and mercantilists are better at generating income which has placed them in a stronger position.
The take-away: any extreme system that is not built on a balance of differing forces will tend towards oppression. The focus should be on preventing oppressive regimes, rather than lauding one form over another, as we need to draw from all forms if we are to sustain freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
That is pretty far from what the book describes.
A totalitarian state is a micromanaging state to the extreme and it is honestly the better description of the world in George Orwells novel.
Totalitarianism is according to both true oldschool conservatives and communists, but most other democratic ideologies are far removed from that.
A lot of politics around the world seems to be suffering from exactly the same problems: Too powerful and undemocratic administratons, too much economic pressure (lobbying and binding economic support for politicians) and not enough openness in procedures.
It does not matter at all who you vote for. The problem is in the system and it does not go away by switching voodoo-doll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Doubtful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Doubtful
Technically, yes. "Conspiracy theory" means a hypothesis of conspiratorial actions. It says nothing about how accurate that hypothesis is.
If by "they" you mean "the government", then there is zero indication that "they're" out to do that. However, there are several private-sector efforts to do exactly that, so if by "they" you mean private-sector corporations, then yes, they are out to do it.
By the way, if you think the current administration is even remotely socialist, then you either misunderstand what socialism is or you aren't paying attention to what the administration has been doing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dont be so bloody ridiculous! the reason he's been given the job is because he is a 'yes man', just doing as he's told. the real question to ask is who stands to gain the most financially when whatever 'cyber security' bill is introduced? what's the betting the chances are it will be some senator?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The timing of this is suspicious
It's one of the great ironies of our time that climate change -- which, unlike cyberwar is actually real and is actually an existential threat to the United States -- is still being denied by some and explained away by others, while greedy government contractors hyping fabricated threats in order to line their own pockets are getting serious attention from Congress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What makes the Queen a King?
whoever wants to head a relevant federal agency had better show up ready to say "yes" to the conventional beaurocratic wisdom or learn to fly unceremoniously out the window.
Of course, the "done deal" that shows up in the American legislative tea leaves is yet another indistinguishable version of PIPA, SOPA, ACTA, CISPA or Six Strikes....In short, yet one more repackage of assorted nullifications of American Constitutional and Civil Liberties....things like broad grants of Immunity to govermental and Private agencies for damages inflicted on innocents; conversion of Presumption of Innocence into (cough, cough) rebuttable presumption of guilt; rechartering of National Security Agencies to operate within the United States with American Citizens as legitimate subjects of investigation; expansion of government and private party actions that can be taken prior to or without warrant; incorporation in written law of the effectiveness of Commercial TOS waivers as dispositive for the waiver of Constitutionally protected rights.
Took a lot of Balls to present the American People with these already known bundles of nullifications of their Civil and Constitutional Rights....Will take even less brains to offer up the next pretty package with these same traps restated....
Yet,if these "powers that be" were so powerful and unopposable, don't you think they could have saved themselves from the public bitch-slapping the American People gave them the first time around in the matters of PIPA, SOPA, ACTA, CISPA?
The special interest beneficiaries of these laws don't just "want" Immunity from Liability....They desperately NEED Immunity from liability....and the American People said, very LOUDLY...."NO! You cant't have Immunity from Liability!"
Why?
Because the next Public Bitch-Slapping is going to send the political hacks who protect these special Interests permenantly into the closet in a coma.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course he resigned his ideas do not fit the current narrative.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The war on terror was also prepared for many years before 9/11 actually happened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overstating...
It's like everyone in the government has some form of Tourette syndrome...
"Think of the children!"
"Terror threats!"
and now...
"Cyber Threats!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on May 21st, 2012 @ 1:48pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And what a casuality
http://news.yahoo.com/virtual-terrorism-al-qaeda-video-calls-electronic-jihad-214355054.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]