Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FBI Need Potheads To Fight Cybercrime

Soulskill posted about 4 months ago | from the government-dorito-budget-not-up-to-snuff dept.

Crime 319

An anonymous reader writes "The rate of cybercrime is growing and growing, and law enforcement is struggling to keep up. The FBI is in the process of beefing up its headcount, but they're running into a problem: many of the hackers applying for these jobs have a history of marijuana use, and the agency has a zero tolerance policy. FBI Director James Comey said, 'I have to hire a great work force to compete with those cyber criminals and some of those kids want to smoke weed on the way to the interview.' However, change may be on the horizon: Comey said the FBI is changing 'both our mindset and the way we do business.' He also encouraged job applications from former pot users despite the policy."

cancel ×

319 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good idea (-1, Troll)

bhcompy (1877290) | about 4 months ago | (#47051317)

Big government always likes people that have physical and/or psychological dependencies. Easier to manipulate.

Re:Good idea (2)

x0ra (1249540) | about 4 months ago | (#47051701)

Do you mean as they do by all the way you can be charged with a felony, and even more controlled afterward ?

Re:Good idea (2)

flyneye (84093) | about 4 months ago | (#47052123)

History is NO liar (provided it is not a govt. approved textbook)

Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (5, Insightful)

davydagger (2566757) | about 4 months ago | (#47051349)

Wait a second, I thought potheads were worthless burnouts who will never amount to anything?

Looks like one bullshit stereotype driven war is affecting our ability to fight another bullshit stereotype driven war.

The irony is fucking killing me.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (-1, Troll)

johnsie (1158363) | about 4 months ago | (#47051371)

I've never seen a pothead do anything useful with a computer.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051443)

Yes you have, you just don't know it because they aren't advertising that they smoke.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051467)

This is true

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 4 months ago | (#47052139)

Six figure salary in IT here. Can confirm.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (5, Funny)

NotInHere (3654617) | about 4 months ago | (#47051497)

Smoke from what? Too much current? Its pretty hard to make a pothead [wikipedia.org] smoke!

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051801)

Com'on, assholes. That shit was hilarious.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

budgenator (254554) | about 4 months ago | (#47051963)

Pump enough current through and just about anything will smoke, shorting out a 200 amp mains feed will do it PDQ.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051479)

I've never seen a pothead do anything useful.

FTFY.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051547)

Wow! How'd you manage that?

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (2)

dcollins (135727) | about 4 months ago | (#47052115)

Maybe you were too drunk to notice.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 4 months ago | (#47051383)

So... is this whole situation good or bad?
It's a moral infinite loop.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051555)

When has admitting that you smoke pot to a law enforcement officer ever turned out to be "good" for you? Seriously, if you hack and smoke pot, don't work for the FBI. Not until pot becomes legal everywhere in the US.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 4 months ago | (#47051897)

Occasionally (depending on the individual LEO, the circumstances, and your flawless delivery) you can use a truthful response to your advantage during a roadside interview.

Believe you me, the cops don't get blunt honesty a great deal, and some find it quite refreshing.

Caveat: YMMV. There would be a much greater probability of a positive outcome if you were admitting to some minor marijuana use versus having a body in the trunk.

Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051393)

Or maybe it is unrelated to conspiracy theory bs?

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051399)

Wait a second, I thought potheads were worthless burnouts who will never amount to anything?

Exactly right. You'd better start snorting coke if you ever want to amount to anything, you worthless piece of shit.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 4 months ago | (#47051453)

Wait a second, I thought potheads were worthless burnouts who will never amount to anything?

Well, Eric Holder is the Attorney General . . . and any time he opens his mouth . . . I think he's tripping his balls off on LSD.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051463)

potheads were worthless burnouts who will never amount to anything?

Considering I've never heard directly of anyone in this industry using it, I think the stereotype is correct. Personally I didn't see it in college (BS in Comp Sci in 1989) nor have I seen it in the twenty-five years since. Pot use just doesn't happen in this industry.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051505)

You must be smoking the reefer then.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (4, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 4 months ago | (#47051713)

Pot use just doesn't happen in this industry.

...and there are no gays in Iran. Right. :-)

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

drpimp (900837) | about 4 months ago | (#47051863)

If a hacker smoke pots in the woods and no one is around, does that mean it didn't happen? I am sure if you dug deep enough many of your neighbors are doing it at least occasionally; you just don't know about it. The mere fact that it's illegal most people don't go around with a blunt lit up promoting their usage.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

sfcat (872532) | about 4 months ago | (#47051939)

potheads were worthless burnouts who will never amount to anything?

Considering I've never heard directly of anyone in this industry using it, I think the stereotype is correct. Personally I didn't see it in college (BS in Comp Sci in 1989) nor have I seen it in the twenty-five years since. Pot use just doesn't happen in this industry.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, I hope that was sarcasm...

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052037)

What industry? Software development? Engineering? I would say a very large percentage smoke pot. Probably a majority of the good ones...

RF Engineer here. I like to smoke after work.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051595)

> potheads...never amount to anything

That is true. I'm a Senior Director of Product Development, and out of the (wild guess) six hundred guys I've hired that made it past our screening process, I've only lost one to the drug test. Drug addicts just don't make good developers. Also while I've fired quite a few guys for DUIs or other alcohol-related charges, I have never had a developer arrested for a drug-related charge(well, that I know of) On the other hand, I've probably had 5% of the QA candidates washout because of failing the drug test and quite a few that had been fired due to drug-related arrests. A drug addict might be able to do QA, but I have never seen one that could do development.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051749)

i'm sure slamming caffeine and nicotine doesn't count as "drug addicts" on your delusional pedestal.

you're not a senior director of anything. you are NOTHING, coward.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051773)

Or maybe...just maybe...they're avoiding you on purpose and are going for greener pastures instead? You'd make a lousy statistician.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051847)

I'm an accomplished software developer, i smoke pot, i make 6 figures have a family and kids. I have many friends who smoke pot, they include directors of large telecommunications companies, several engineers of different disciplines, and of course other developers. We all have nice houses, cars some of us have boats, yachts and horses. We all hang out and smoke pot together, work on recreational software/hardware projects some private some public, some open source some closed.

We have an uncanny ability to find our own kind like most other subcultures and like many we don't advertise it.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052043)

We have an uncanny ability to find our own kind like most other subcultures and like many we don't advertise it.

To be fair, it's really not that hard to spot the coder covered in Cheeto dust...

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052073)

wish I could mod this up.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051927)

It's likely that those developers are avoiding working for companies that do drug testing. In fact, I'm surprised that your company has it. I've worked at 3 different Fortune 1000 companies over the last 17 years, and not one required drug testing for developers or IT workers. Maybe I just got lucky.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (2)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 4 months ago | (#47052001)

You are forgetting the possibility that your sample may not be representative. They may self-select against jobs that drug test, or they may be good at passing drug tests through various means.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 4 months ago | (#47052009)

Marijuana is nothing more than a condiment, a spice if you will.

It doesn't encourage it's users to rob liquor stores or eat the face off each other, and unlike it's completely legal cousin alcohol, it is not a leading cause of family violence... I will bet a lot of the children of abusive alcoholics wish their dads would've smoked a little reefer.

On the negative side of the list, weed does take a few points off of the old IQ in exchange for a helping of spontaneous creativity, and truth be told, it's not healthy to inhale the fruits of any burning matter.

There is indeed an occasional Spiccoli Peak if you catch that lightning in a bottle, and that's when you can Melange up and fold space. Yes, creative people seeking innovative solutions might be on the watch list.

Re:Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052071)

Like most drugs "smoking pot" != "drug addict" anymore than "drinking" == "alcoholic". I know plenty of people who use pot, hash, coke, or molly recreationally and still produce top notch software, chances are you have used some of it. On the other hand, I've seen people washout because they couldn't handle the combination of freedom and alcohol. The ones who would fail the drug test just "get other offers" once you mention the test or don't imbibe while doing a job search.

Re: Let me know when you win that war on drugs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052035)

Potheads boycott FBI and NSA...

Simple solution (1)

NotInHere (3654617) | about 4 months ago | (#47051413)

Outsource them. Not to India, but a private company. Do it like NSA.

Re:Simple solution (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 4 months ago | (#47051557)

Still won't work. Vendors/contractors for the federal government are required by law to do pre-hire drug testing and random drug tests.

Re:Simple solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051885)

No they are not.

Re:Simple solution (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 4 months ago | (#47052025)

Care to cite that law? Also, random drug tests are often not all that random. People often know a week in advance that they, or at least someone is going to be tested.

buzzkill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051419)

Mr. Comey also issued a more serious warning about the long term impacts of the Syrian civil war on global terrorism. He warned that when the Syrian conflict starts winding down, it would produce an outflow of hardened militants that poses a far bigger global terror threat than the outflow of militants that followed the Afghan war against the Russians in the 1980s.

Gosh, maybe all those foreign countries (like the US, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, France, Britain, Turkey, Qatar, Israel, Kuwait) should stop funding and giving weapons to those guys.

Interview on Weed?! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051423)

If you have to smoke weed just to make it to the interview I seriously doubt you'll be able to do the job. Some recreational usage might be fine but it you need it to just get out of your apartment to go to a job interview then you have issues and problems that should disqualify for most any job out there.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051477)

... aren't you nervous when you get to an interview?

its not "get out of your apartment", they perhaps will to help prosecuting their friends if they get the job.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (1)

CheshireDragon (1183095) | about 4 months ago | (#47051521)

Why the hell would you be nervous at a job interview if your qualified for the job?! I've never had a job interview where i was nervous. Even the last one I had for my current position 8yrs ago being interviewed by 3 people from management and two other network admins that were higher on the ladder.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (5, Insightful)

Shados (741919) | about 4 months ago | (#47051661)

Unrelated to the topic, but being qualified for the job and being qualified for the interview is 2 totally different things in the IT and software development field, since there's so many bad interviewers out there.

I wish I could screen for the interview before agreeing to do it. Would save me a lot of trouble.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051741)

Well aren't you special.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051919)

One could for example be a schizoid, or otherwise bad at dealing with people in course of non-technical communication.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 4 months ago | (#47052079)

Because in some cases, there is someone else qualified for the job, perhaps a significant number of someones applying for only one position. The interview may be the deciding factor, otherwise there wouldn't be much of a point in having it (other than perhaps negotiating your pay, which is itself something that may merit concern). Also, you don't seem to be producing a great example here. If your relative strength for the position is stable, you would be more nervous with less experience interviewing, so your most recent interview probably wouldn't be the best example.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052105)

>Why the hell would you be nervous at a job interview if you're qualified for the job

Youth, and lack of self-confidence. I remember being nervous in job interviews in my 20s, in the American Midwest, despite being very qualified. It wasn't until my 30s that I realized how much value I brought to an employer based on my own record of helping business people make millions of dollars in profit with software I designed and built.

That said, showing up for an interview while high shows VERY poor judgement. We need better mental heath care for people who are struggling.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051933)

heaven forbid someone is nervous during a job interview. Show a little self-discipline, after all, when you have a job, you'll be expected to do actual work... even with a government job.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (1)

entrigant (233266) | about 4 months ago | (#47051541)

"have to"? I believe the exact wording was "want to". It's hyperbole meant to demonstrate the level of "tolerance" some of the candidates demand, not to demonstrate their crippling inability to get out of bed.

I do quite well in the private sector, but government is full of "zero tolerance" requirements from recreational drug use to the exact level of college education completed. Combine that with the pitiful wages and I'm amazed they end up with any technology related work force at all. If they'd compete I'd at least consider them. Now I don't even bother looking at them.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (2)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 4 months ago | (#47051615)

If you have to smoke weed just to make it to the interview I seriously doubt you'll be able to do the job. Some recreational usage might be fine but it you need it to just get out of your apartment to go to a job interview then you have issues and problems that should disqualify for most any job out there.

A good point. if you can't stop long enough to pass a drug test for which you know the date, you likely have a problem. One issue is that the FBI loves to do polygraphs. Even though they're not reliable enough to be used in criminal proceedings, they use them for employment screening all the time.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (2)

_merlin (160982) | about 4 months ago | (#47051943)

THC accumulates in fat cells. It can be detected up to three months out if you're a regular user. One of my friends, who was fucking smart but also a serious stoner and a bit of a womaniser, stayed of the whacky tobacky for six weeks before trying to get into the Royal Australian Air Force, but still failed the drug test. A few years later he successfully got into the army after not smoking weed for about six months.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051949)

Heavy user here as AC. I went 3 months without even being in the same room as second-hand smoke. I failed a litmus strip/instant-cup test at a third party lab. Luckily,the job was for a small business owner and he didn't care about THC positive, after I had to awkwardly explain what THC meant. That's 3 months. That is a pretty long time.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051665)

Yah, smokin' weed is crutch. More better to get a Xananx prescription to handle job interview jitters.

Re:Interview on Weed?! (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 4 months ago | (#47051843)

Fortunately for us, Pal Erdos didn't need a job to reshape modern mathematics while on drugs.

Colorado Attorney General (4, Interesting)

TJ_Phazerhacki (520002) | about 4 months ago | (#47051439)

When Colorado passed the recreational Marijuana law last year, the AG stated that he expected to review employment-discrimination cases by the end of this year. It's going to be interesting when it comes to companies that do business in Colorado and other states, since current doctrine allows companies to have policies dependent on individual state laws, but I don't believe any of then conflict with national policy.

Regardless of your stance on the morality of it, maybe we just start treating one drug (MJ) like another (Alcohol or Tobacco) from a legal perspective? Contrary to Mr. Christie, Denver is a fantastic place to live, and I genuinely believe the recreational industry has improved it even more.

Re:Colorado Attorney General (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051711)

We've been tackling this issue in California for a long time now.

Northern California is home to what is literally the best outdoor pot growing land in the world. THC is plant sunscreen and we've got more sunny days than anywhere else that isn't a dried up dessert.

There are a LOT of poor as fuck rural counties here where the logging industry has gone away. Guess what the primary industry in this counties is? You guessed it. And it's skyrocketed with pot's semi-legal status.

As a consequence, in these counties, a gross majority of the employable population won't pass a piss test for pot. (Hey. At least they aren't doing meth. That and oxy are the real scourge of the rural poor)

If you want to setup shop, be you a local business, tourist destination, or even a national chain fast foot place you simply can't drug test. If you do, you won't have any employees to man the counters. That, and you have to compete with the industry itself. Why work some shit retail job when trimming pays twice as much and you get some free product to enjoy when you go home?

Re:Colorado Attorney General (1, Redundant)

Pax681 (1002592) | about 4 months ago | (#47051817)

Contrary to Mr. Christie, Denver is a fantastic place to live, and I genuinely believe the recreational industry has improved it even more. --

Colorado, specially Denver is fantastic.. I go regularly to visit friends and for a wee bit of work. The state is happy as it's got massively increased tax revenue and the people are happy as they no longer are victimised for having a wee smoke. Police are happy as they can get on with other more serious stuff... and i mention the police as one of my friends over is a policeman and he and his colleagues much prefer it this way.

Re:Colorado Attorney General (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052051)

Do you ever have a wee while you're in Denver? Maybe a wee wee that comes out of your wee-wee?

Frito-Lay Inorporated loves this! (0)

Hartree (191324) | about 4 months ago | (#47051441)

Imagine what this will do to sales of Doritos from the vending machines at the FBI.

Re:Frito-Lay Inorporated loves this! (1)

Virtucon (127420) | about 4 months ago | (#47051509)

It's all about the Twinkies and snowballs...

Re:Frito-Lay Inorporated loves this! (1)

CheshireDragon (1183095) | about 4 months ago | (#47051535)

Fuck that! I'll be across the street at the burger joint ordering fries!

Re:Frito-Lay Inorporated loves this! (1)

Akaihiryuu (786040) | about 4 months ago | (#47051689)

I've always said, if I get wind of a national legalization of marijuana, I am going to buy a ton of stock in Frito-Lay.

Drunk (4, Insightful)

dickplaus (2461402) | about 4 months ago | (#47051461)

Look I'm all for allowing them to smoke on their own time, but I don't show up to interviews or work buzzing off of a couple bloody marys. Relax the drug screenings yes, but showing up high? That's just immature IMHO.

Re:Drunk (5, Insightful)

Jmc23 (2353706) | about 4 months ago | (#47051489)

About as immature as all those people showing up to work buzzed on caffeine.

Different bodies function differently. Just like the majority of people need something to speed them up, some people need something to slow them down.

Re: Drunk (1)

dickplaus (2461402) | about 4 months ago | (#47051517)

And I work better with a couple beers too but that won't fly at a job.

Re: Drunk (1)

Jmc23 (2353706) | about 4 months ago | (#47051699)

Works well enough for bartenders... and executives.

You must be a drone.

Re:Drunk (0)

CheshireDragon (1183095) | about 4 months ago | (#47051561)

Apparently you've never been high or drunk. Those two have a vastly different effect than pussy ass caffeine.

Re:Drunk (2)

Jmc23 (2353706) | about 4 months ago | (#47051723)

I've been both, and caffeine is the only one I can't deal with or do any work on.

Did you even read the second line I wrote? Try understanding it.

Re:Drunk (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47052097)

Really? Here is a study about the effects various recreational pharmaceuticals have on how spiders construct their webs:

http://www.trinity.edu/jdunn/spiderdrugs.htm

There is no picture for alcohol - probably because it would have killed the spider. However, Marijuana did far better than Caffeine. In fact, all the webs were far better than Caffeine except sleeping pills but that's only because the spider didn't get far enough to complete anything.

I'm not suggesting the hyper-perfect structures of the tripping spider's webs means we should trip at work (or at all for that matter). What I am suggesting is that to a rational person, the legality of a substance isn't directly correlated with its effects on people making decisions in the work place. Caffeine seems to create a state of ADHD and that is the last person I'd want making complicated decisions such as network design, risk management, corporate strategy, company policy, etc.,... You know, things that need to be well planned, stable for long periods of time because they are not easily changed - things that require a commitment.

One of the senior managers where I work is like this. Its amazing how much havoc her energy drinks cause on a daily basis. I know it's the Caffeine - she went cold turkey for a while and was drinking green tea instead. She was all of a sudden rational, could hold complicated thoughts could follow things through multiple cause/effect trees, etc.,... Then back on the Caffeine and she was once again like the scatter brained Caffeinated (redundant) spider.

A cup of joe in the morning is one thing just like a single beer at lunch - probably not really an issue as far as job performance. However, with both Alcohol and Marijuana, someone doesn't cause MORE havoc the more they take. Instead, they pass out or space out. I'd much rather have someone produce nothing than produce pure chaos.

Re:Drunk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051677)

Are you a fucking moron?

Re:Drunk (4, Informative)

sjames (1099) | about 4 months ago | (#47051627)

It used to be fairly common to have a couple drinks at lunch.

ended pretty much by the end of the 80s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051793)

A combination of forces has pretty much made the liquid lunch history(at least in technical fields). Neoprohibitionists (MADD, which is no longer about driving, but about drinking, per se), employer paranoia about "impaired employees", etc. But the biggest factor is "internet time". There's no time for a long lunch and slow afternoon any more. Used to be, you'd get the stuff done in the morning, get it to the mail room, and the absolute soonest you'd get comments back would be a week, because it had to travel through gloom of night on the courier's appointed rounds, then they'd have to type their responses (no word processors in the early 80s: runoff and all caps on greenbar doesn't hack it for real business communications) and send them back. Now, though, you get text messages during your (working) lunch asking for a response "soonest", and somehow I think that if you texted back "sorry, getting a couple pints with the guys, get back to you tomorrow", the next text would be "we'll ship your stuff to you at the last address you had on file with HR".

I'm trying to remember the last time there was a "go out to lunch and get beer and pizza" type thing, and I'm thinking mid 80s. There might be a Friday afternoon "we got the proposal in on schedule" every 5-6 years but that's end of workweek not expected to toil afterwards.

A friend blames it all on couriers and FedEx (work all day, FedEx carries through the night, delivering in the morning at the other end), but in the 80s you still had to type the stuff out, which was generally NOT done by the engineer or technical person, but by clerical staff.
I blame more of it on the Internet and cheap PCs, which made it possible to disintermediate the whole transaction: no courier service, no typist, no graphic artist. This is BAD: most engineers are lousy copy editors and lousy graphic artists,and sorry, clip art help from Powerpoint and Word's grammar/spell checker are a bad substitute, and slower than people who are good at it.

Re:ended pretty much by the end of the 80s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051929)

> ended pretty much by the end of the 80s

It really didn't. Pub lunches are common in London to this day.

Re:ended pretty much by the end of the 80s (1)

sjames (1099) | about 4 months ago | (#47052059)

The funny thing is, everyone spins faster but it's just spinning in place. No more of worth gets accomplished. For all that talk about internet speed, real accomplishments move slower than ever.

Re:Drunk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051915)

Literally nobody is showing up to interviews high; the guy who they quoted is presenting total hyperbole as truth to try to give his otherwise-untenable position a bit of weight.

Re:Drunk (1)

dcollins (135727) | about 4 months ago | (#47052145)

I'm sure that FBI Director James Comey has specific case files he can point to of this actually happening, and wasn't engaging in hyperbolic BS like he normally does.

I call BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051469)

I've been programming professionally for just over thirty years, and in that time I got a BS in Comp Eng in 1993 and a MS in Comp Sci in 2001. I have never even seen pot. I can't remember ever hearing anyone in this field mention using it. It just isn't common in our field. Of course when I was hiring for a new janitorial position here, I couldn't find a single male that could pass the drug test so it appears to be only the uneducated that use it.

Re: I call BS (3, Insightful)

dickplaus (2461402) | about 4 months ago | (#47051485)

Must be true. You are statistically significant.

Re: I call BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051635)

Not as if you have any data to back your speculation. If someone tolerates cannabis usage well on a day-to-day basis, it's no different from going to work on Prozac for your crazy or Vicodin for your wisdom teeth. It's just a (self-)medication for a lot of people.

In environments where everyone has to have optimal situational awareness and response time, all psychoactive substances should be scruitinized. Operating heavy equipment or moving control rods is a whole lot different from writing code or doing IT ops work, where situational awareness and response to imminent physical danger aren't generally relevant.

If someone can't do their job because they're too stoned, fire that person; chances are they're just lazy and would fuck off regardless.

Re: I call BS (1)

dickplaus (2461402) | about 4 months ago | (#47051951)

Well like I said before I can drink and handle it just fine but I don't because that's not 'professional'. Hell I'd probably work better with others if I could snag a couple brews around lunch.

Re:I call BS (1)

DarkSage (208892) | about 4 months ago | (#47051533)

Yeah, I am gonna go ahead and have to disagree with that. Non-statistical personal experiences are worth just about as much as opinions.

Re:I call BS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051585)

He can't help it that he lives in his mom's basement and telecommutes to work everyday, go easy on him.

Re:I call BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051657)

You're probably just in the wrong branch. I know a lot of programmers who don't, but I know plenty in my branch of Network Administration that do. Many of them have a BS in Advanced Networking. Others have MS in Info Systems. ALL of us at least have a CCNP in one area or the other(mine is in VoIP, I love it) Myself and a few others decided a year ago to go on and get our Doctor of Management in IS and Technology. We are not a dim-bulb group of people

Re:I call BS (4, Insightful)

x0ra (1249540) | about 4 months ago | (#47051685)

Let me guess. You probably dress in a shirt with a tie and wear some clean pants. On casual Friday, you *might* switch to a polo. Guess what ? You might not be what the FBI is looking for..

Re:I call BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051771)

> On casual Friday, you *might* switch to a polo

I'm the GP, and I usually wear Hawaiian shirts on Friday. Your stereotype is wrong.

My work for AOL and later MSN and finally Wal-Mart has resulted in the arrests of at least two dozen crackers. I know the type well that tries to break into systems, and I've had several world-class hackers work for me over the years, and as far as I know, none of them have ever used drugs. I know that none of them have ever failed a drug test. Drug addicts aren't the type that can be successful at either side of the hacking problem.

If pot was popular in this field, it seems that one of the over eight hundred connections I have at Linkedin would have mentioned it sometime.

Re:I call BS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051895)

Well damn, none of your connections on Linkedin mention their drug use? And none of your employees mentioned behavior that could have negative consequences to their employment? That certainly means that there is no drug use in your industry.

Re:I call BS (2)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 4 months ago | (#47051755)

So what are the tech wages like in Salt Lake City?

Re:I call BS (4, Insightful)

Pax681 (1002592) | about 4 months ago | (#47051841)

I've been programming professionally for just over thirty years, and in that time I got a BS in Comp Eng in 1993 and a MS in Comp Sci in 2001. I have never even seen pot. I can't remember ever hearing anyone in this field mention using it. It just isn't common in our field. Of course when I was hiring for a new janitorial position here, I couldn't find a single male that could pass the drug test so it appears to be only the uneducated that use it.

that's because all the people who DO smoke it KNOW you are a prick and thus don't mention it near you

i'm a hacker who's never used pot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051637)

where do i apply?

Re:i'm a hacker who's never used pot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051865)

If you smoked pot, you'd know where to apply.

The FBI is encouraging illegal drug use? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051671)

Did I miss something? Even my employer doesn't do that and I hired him (ie I'm on the board of the corporation for which I work, and am the CEO, and personally I support legalization, but done condone it on the job, lol).

Re:The FBI is encouraging illegal drug use? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051729)

Not exactly. The FBI guy is talking about loosening the restriction about hiring hackers who have toked within the last 3 years. Pot use is not condoned (it's illegal in most states!), and I'm pretty sure you'd have to give it up if you went to work for the FBI.

Riiiight. (2)

PvtVoid (1252388) | about 4 months ago | (#47051705)

The only FBI agent I have ever known reasonably well was a scoutmaster and used his boy scout troop as couriers to deal weed. True story.

Re:Riiiight. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051839)

The problem isn't "FBI Agent." The problem is "Scoutmaster."

LOL funny story (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051921)

I've got a funny story. I had to go rack some servers at Area 71 [wikipedia.org] as part of the Ingram Micro services network. Or whatever they call it. I worked at WM home office before this job, and was familiar with their data centers, anyway.

Anyway, when you pull up to the security gate [google.com] , you get asked for what WM calls a "RFAR number". So I was riding with my friend, and he called it a "reefer number" right into the speaker. LOL!

They were like, "Who are you with?!" And my friend was like, "I got a reefer number!". And she was so mad...

They got so pissed!!!!! LOL! True story.

NO SHIT:::: The captcha was "intercom" How does that even happen?

They already employ former cannabis users (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47051953)

Hint: people will lie if a policy is both overly-strict and unenforceable. I guarantee you they have a substantial number of employees, probably even at director levels, who have used cannabis at least once in their lifetime. It wouldn't surprise me if James Corney is one of those people, but can, like, totally explain why his joint at 19 years old was okay but other peoples' use wasn't.

No they don't... (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 4 months ago | (#47052063)

They just need to actually advertise for those positions.

Anyone seen the FBI recruiting for hackers?

Nope? Okay... so there's your problem.

If they're really serious they'll talk to the Pentagon about how to actually get recruitment flowing.

It requires things like "placing an ad"... in anything. And then manning the phone or email address cited.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?