zlacker

We are pretty open here in the US, sure. I mean I'd never expect things like [0] from China, let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia.

I say let them keep trying, with some security tweaks here and there as needed/justified. But redouble our connections with academia. We need to harness massive growth in the face of such a conservative opponent, not more excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon.

0. https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil

>>themod+(OP)
This sounds crazy

>>themod+(OP)
>not excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon.

What sort of signal in the noise would tell us that it is indeed time to slow things down and stabilize around security?

>>themod+(OP)
> let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia.

The US was able to use their lead in computers to design stealth aircraft based on Soviet mathematics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev

>>DeonPe+P1
Sounds more like a Chinese agent trying to steal American secrets.

>>remark+J2
Your enemies have more resources to gamble on openness than you do. Which they don't, not even close.

Or their espionage _and_ replication skills, given the tech and human gap, are good enough to make up for it. Which, based on the domestic defense tech we are seeing from China, is not yet even close to proven.

It's not a time to be cocky. But we must continue to leverage our comparatively open processes. That was a key lesson of the cold war.

>>Someth+33
Ding Ding...we have a winner. I work in the maritime technology space for several large corporations and over the past 18-24 months it is crazy how many LinkedIn requests, cold emails, etc from pretty obvious fabricated profiles from China (and some RU) I've been receiving.

side-note - completed a graduate program @ MIT

>>themod+64
Our open processes let the Chinese collect detailed records on every cleared person in the US when the OPM didn't bother to follow the NSA security guidelines.

>>rangib+V2
This would prove the OP's point, wouldn't it ? Soviet Russians had interesting discoveries in semiconductors also [1]. However, they were never able to parlay it to economic success as US and other western powers were able to

[1] https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/did-russia-have...

>>kevin_+R4
Even better reason to keep pushing forward on new plans and sacrificing security rather than doubling down on security. Make the information obsolete. There's always a hole or a mole somewhere, so you widen the economic-technological gap.

Also in this arena it strikes me that western cyber forces are fortunate indeed that their potential adversaries have a famously centralized governing style. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that we already had some hilariously complete records of that sort from our own expeditions.

>>Workah+m4
Dear MIT graduate, please join our espion...err LinkedIn group thank you

>>simula+b6
I wasn't trying to correct anyone, I just thought it was an interesting factoid

>>themod+47
>Make the information obsolete.

You can't be serious. "Make private information public" is an absurd reaction to what is a clearly offensive operation.