Historically, software that can only be sold in one country has suffered badly in the marketplace against software that can be sold everywhere. I first saw that at GEAC, when they were certified in (if memory serves) Germany and started seeing many more sales in countries we'd never heard of before (;-))
If you have to have software that's designed to meet a required lowness of confidentiality, you'll be the only country writing it. You probably won't trust another tin-pot country's software, and will have to keep doing it all yourself.
Vendors want to sell software that meets the highest standards, so they can sell it into lots of countries, not write individual specials for every tin-pot dictator on the planet.
Image how much fun it will be, trying to write your own routers, your own google, your own facebook, etc, etc. All so you can lower the quality.
Actually it doesn't scale: if you have strong enough dependencies, A: B, eventually you'll start getting B: A. If either has a bug, they all have a bug. This is one of the things that MVS programs suffered from, as people kept putting stuff into them, typically until they could send mail (;-))
Some chaps at Bell Labs saw the problem and invented pipes, tools and loose coupling.
... dictates the answer. Reasoning strictly inside the box that creates, if you then try to propose a robot can use it's own judgment for everything but firing a weapon, you'll get criticized for hitting the edge of the box and not allowing it to actually be autonomous.
In fact, the question isn't "how autonomous", it's "autonomous or not".
At the technical level, treat it as if it were "bufferboat", make sure your buffers are configured properly, and use an AQM algorithm like fq_codel. Doubly so if you're Level 3 or any other poor ISP connected to the culprits!
Clearly the smart move is to leave, and become a service provider. Start a security focused business, start something the NSA themselves will have trouble getting into, and you provide incentive for them to buy their way in when your security focus attracts someone they find interesting
I wasn't asking about legitimate spin-offs, I was wondering how many of them are pure crooks (;-))
When Sun still existed, it wasn't at all unexpected for a couple of people to leave to start their own business, work on something on their own nickel that Sun wasn't going to fund, and see if they'd get bought.
The Sun very-very-multithreaded chips came out of two hardware designers thinking that there was a better way to go fast than "this chip is so hot it glows in the dark". They got lots of parallel threads almost immediately, whereupon Sun bought them! They eventually got faster single-threaded performance too, all out if breaking up the function units very differently.
All large organizations suffer from this phenomenon, whether they're public or private. All large organizations suffer from crooks walking out with thumb-drives, too...
The NSA has its grubby little paws everywhere.
I wonder how many of these companies were started by ex-sysadmins with their pockets full of thumb-drives? Is their security is that bad, there must be a thriving business in recycled secrets (;-))
Belinda Padilla does not pick up unknown calls anymore, not since someone posted her cellphone number on an online forum for gun enthusiasts. Then someone snapped pictures of the address where she has a P.O. box and put those online, too. In a crude, cartoonish scrawl, this person drew an arrow to the blurred image of a woman passing through the photo frame. “Belinda?” the person wrote. “Is that you?”
Her offense? Trying to market and sell a new
“I have no qualms with the idea of personally and professionally leveling the life of someone who has attempted to profit from disarming me and my fellow Americans,” one commenter wrote.
Their complaint? The gubmint...
Function reject.
