DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Cops and Robbers » Federal Bureau of Luddites

Federal Bureau of Luddites

Most of you have prob­a­bly heard about the FBI’s tech­nol­ogy prob­lems: The field offices that still aren’t con­nected to the ‘Net. The 8,000 employ­ees who don’t have fbi​.gov e-​​mail addresses. The case man­age­ment data­base that’s straight out of the leisure suit era.
ace_g_man_stories_canada_194305.jpgBut what’s not as widely known is why the bureau is so behind the times. The big cul­prit is FBI cul­ture, it turns out. Until very recently, being computer-​​savvy hasn’t been con­sid­ered much of an asset in the FBI, and clues were some­thing you kept to your­self.
My story in Slate explains. Check it out — it’s my first one for ‘em.
UPDATE 6:03 PM: Slate is more of an essay-​​driven oper­a­tion. So I didn’t get to use some of the juicier quotes that I squeezed from folks in research­ing this story. Here are a few:

*“Compar[ing] with the FBI is like com­par­ing the Neanderthal sys­tem of ‘one bang club on cave mean yes, two mean no,’ to the futur­is­tic Star Trek vision of inter­galac­tic com­mu­ni­ca­tions that tran­scend time and dis­tance. If Captain Kirk found him­self in… the FBI head­quar­ters build­ing in D.C., he surely would tap the com­mu­ni­ca­tor on his chest with the com­ment ‘Scotty, beam me up, there is no intel­li­gent life in this rec­tan­gu­lar cave.’” 

– for­mer NSA officer

* “Guys would write their notes on legal pads, and lock them in a safe at night when they went home.”

– for­mer FBI agent

* Every SAC [Special Agent in Charge of an FBI office] is his own king. And they don’t like peo­ple from other divi­sions com­ing into their king­doms… If I’m work­ing on an L.A. case, and I’ve got leads in Chicago, the atti­tude is, ‘Why Go?’ Everyone gets tied in knots.” 

– for­mer FBI agent

* “Everything the Bureau has been talk­ing about, theyve had here for years… You cant believe how far ahead they are here.“

– U.S. Strategic Command ana­lyst, for­merly with the FBI.

(And before you ask: Yeah, I talked to cur­rent agents, too. They just weren’t as snarky as the exes.)

Share |

April 4th, 2006 | Cops and Robbers, Homeland Security, Info War | 312224 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/04/04/federal-bureau-of-luddites/Federal+Bureau+of+Luddites2006-04-04+22%3A08%3A03david_axe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Iran’s Kooky, Incendiary Arsenal | The Games NASA Plays » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. sglover says:
    April 4, 2006 at 5:48 pm

    Glad to see you’re writ­ing for Slate. Their sta­ble of writ­ers is absolutely pathetic. Now, along with Fred Kaplan, there’ll be two rea­sons to look in on the site.

    Reply
  2. DS says:
    April 5, 2006 at 4:01 am

    Ok, I can’t think of a way to relate this to Iran, or secret ultra­sonic anti­grav­ity spy­planes, or even Google Mapping, so I give up…

    Reply
  3. kg2v says:
    April 5, 2006 at 8:21 am

    Another fac­tor I’ve rarely seen pointed out, and a rea­son SO many Government Computer projects go wrong.
    The whole way they have soft­ware devel­op­ment setup just will NOT work.
    There is a tru­ism in soft­ware devel­op­ers — the aver­age pro­gram­mer is 10 times bet­ter than the low end, and the top end is 10 times bet­ter than aver­age — yes folks, there is a 100x fac­tor there
    Now the trick to devel­op­ing GOOD soft­ware on time/​in bud­get is to get those top pro­gram­mers, and elim­i­nate the bot­tom ones (an aside — the rea­son Microsoft’s soft­ware gets worse is that as the become big­ger, their per­cent­age of pro­gram­mers below aver­age increases)
    So, why doesn’t the Government hire the top, and get rid of the bot­tom (who can actu­ally be net NEGATIVE coders) — The prob­lem with get­ting rid of the bot­tom is sim­ple — unions. It’s really hard to show who doesn’t cut it, and who does, but if you were to ask the other coders, they’ll know
    As for not hir­ing the top, let me tell you a story. Right after 9/​11 I looked into chang­ing from the com­mer­cial sec­tor to the Government sec­tor — do some­thing “real”. Looked through the offer­ings, and I laughed. One the aver­age, in 2001, peo­ple like the FBI etc were pay­ing LESS for a pro­gram­mer with 10 years expe­ri­ence than I got as a Jr Programmer in 1991, and I’m NOT talk­ing about adjusted for expe­ri­ence. I would have had to take about a 45% cut in pay to make the jump, and I’m NOT in bank­ing or finance, where I could be earn­ing around 40% more than I am here
    So, how do you attract TOP tal­ent when you are pay­ing well below aver­age? A top pro­gram­mer is going to pull in a 100K-​​150K pay rate. But remem­ber, he will pro­duce work­ing soft­ware 10x bet­ter than the 60k pro­gram­mer!
    I’ve known a few Government pro­gram­mers — almost all of them were right out of school to get the expe­ri­ence, and they ALL left within a few years

    Reply
  4. Mike says:
    April 5, 2006 at 8:53 am

    From the sound of it, this isn’t nec­es­sar­ily a soft­ware cod­ing issue, but a net­work infra­struc­ture issue. They have Software issues, but it sounds like con­nect­ing all the offices with a reli­able net­work would be the first place to start.

    Reply
  5. Edward Liu says:
    April 5, 2006 at 9:34 am

    kg2v: Are the FBI or the pro­gram­mers for them even union­ized? Not that a union wouldn’t make things harder, but after about 12 years in the busi­ness, I’ve found that it isn’t any eas­ier to get fire rot­ten pro­gram­mers in non-​​unionized envi­ron­ments. I think the spec­tre of unlaw­ful ter­mi­na­tion law­suits means a pro­gram­mer has got to screw up regally and prov­ably to be fired for cause. In almost every case, it’s eas­ier to get a bad pro­gram­mer to leave by giv­ing them a poor per­for­mance review and no raise.
    I think every pro­gram­mer who’s been in the biz for any length of time knows the rule about how much bet­ter a good pro­gram­mer is than a bad one, and even how the truly bad pro­gram­mers act as NEGATIVE head­count (mean­ing that their pro­gram­ming is so bad that other pro­gram­mers waste time fix­ing all their SNAFUs). However, upper man­age­ment and the bean coun­ters have never seemed to be aware of how skill in pro­gram­ming makes one worker more valu­able than another. In my time in the biz, I’ve seen the pen­du­lum swing between “let’s send all the pro­gram­ming to India” and “let’s fire all our vet­er­ans and hire a bunch of col­lege kids,” both of which are founded on the prin­ci­ple that 3 or 4 cheap pro­gram­mers must be bet­ter than 1 expen­sive one.
    And, in any event, it really sounds like the FBI’s prob­lems aren’t even get­ting THAT far.

    Reply
  6. MikeT says:
    April 5, 2006 at 9:35 am

    kg2v,
    There are no such pro­gram­mer unions, espe­cially not in con­trac­tor cir­cles. Second, con­tract­ing jobs for the DoJ and DoD tend to pay sig­nif­i­cantly bet­ter in most areas than reg­u­lar jobs because of the secu­rity clear­ances that are involved. All of that is basic pub­lic knowl­edge for those going to col­lege for CS degrees near or work­ing near/​in areas with big con­tract­ing work. I’m not try­ing to be snarky, but I just don’t have any idea where you’re get­ting this infor­ma­tion from because these agen­cies don’t really do any inter­nal work. 95% of it is out­sourced to defense and other con­trac­tors rang­ing from CGI-​​AMS to Lockheed Martin. Yes, Lockheed has a major IT sec­tor to it, espe­cially in Northern Virginia.

    Reply
  7. David Foster says:
    April 5, 2006 at 9:38 am

    I don’t think the ques­tion of what kind of pro­gram­mers the gov­ern­ment should hire is directly rel­e­vant. Major gov’t com­puter projects are gen­er­ally devel­oped by con­trac­tors: the pre­vi­ous attempt at an FBI case man­age­ment sys­tem was done by SAIC.

    Reply
  8. TimR says:
    April 5, 2006 at 9:51 am

    Yes, the last attempt was made by SAIC. The prob­lem was prob­a­bly that they had spe­cial agents as the gov­ern­ment reps. Special agents aren’t always the best fit for over­see­ing a project like this. But, at the FBI you have two types of peo­ple. You have Special Agents and igno­rant peas­ants, or at least that is how they view it. Furthermore, the FBI went through like 11 changes of gov­ern­ment rep. in 3 years. Basically, they dropped the ball on 911 as well.
    Fumbling
    Bumbling
    Incompetent

    Reply
  9. Chris says:
    April 5, 2006 at 10:02 am

    I tru­ely think that this Country will be ove­taken by Private Interest Groups and the US Govt. so cor­rupted now and inad­e­quate is going to be a fig­ure Head like the King and Queen of England.…The mis­man­age­ment and utter imcom­petance is astrnomical!!!When these Beaurcrats leave office it is tru­ely amaz­ing that they are so peace­ful and go mak­ing Huge dol­lars for Consulting–Who knows maybe Delay will con­sult other Congressmen on avoid­ing the
    legal things he is going through now.

    Reply
  10. pdquig says:
    April 5, 2006 at 10:09 am

    Having led numer­ous process /​ sys­tems imple­men­ta­tions in com­plex, change-​​resistant orga­ni­za­tions, it is cer­tain that pro­gram­mers have noth­ing to do with the FBI’s issues. My guess is that the trou­bles begin with the first step on the road: the lack of an accepted Problem Statement. If the FBI doesn’t really think it has a prob­lem, can­not artic­u­late it clearly, or can­not achieve buy-​​in from the key participants/​stakeholders, then no amount of process mod­el­ing and sys­tem design is going to succeed.

    Reply
  11. jumb says:
    April 5, 2006 at 11:02 am

    For over 20 years I have worked with all the major fed­eral law enforce­ment agen­cies and their agents, and have been dec­o­rated for my work with and ser­vice to the FBI. I have seen first hand how the FBI works. Because of that expe­ri­ence I can say unequiv­o­cally that the FBI is incred­i­bly, unbe­liev­ably back­ward in its day-​​to-​​day IT and data han­dling.
    While the FBI claims its tech­no­log­i­cal mod­ern­iza­tion is made prob­lem­at­i­cal because of con­cerns over national secu­rity, those fed­eral agen­cies which deal exclu­sively with national secu­rity don’t seem to have appre­hended or expe­ri­enced the insur­mount­able obt­sacles which the FBI’s keep­ers of the flame say they see. Rather, the major source of the back­ward­ness is almost entirely the “Bu’s” Vaticanical cul­ture of inter­nal intrigue and bureau­cratic feu­dal­ism.
    Couple that with a thor­ough indoc­tri­na­tion in arro­gance and con­de­scen­sion toward its peers, unmatched in any hier­ar­chi­cal orga­ni­za­tion out­side of the United States Marine Corps, and you have an agency which is, and will remain, techn­log­i­cally incom­pe­tent and mori­bund. And oer­haps most sur­pris­ingly, 742876because of that supreme con­fi­dence in its own per­fec­tion, the FBI has no real grasp of what the hul­la­ballo is all about.

    Reply
  12. AF says:
    April 5, 2006 at 1:34 pm

    This is just one more exam­ple of why we need small gov­ern­ment. We need to let the pri­vate sec­tor han­dle as much as pos­si­ble.
    Take the TSA at air­ports for exam­ple. I can­not pos­si­bly believe that cre­at­ing this huge bureau­cracy has improved air­port secu­rity. The air­port secu­rity should have been left in the hands of pri­vate contractors…and eco­nomic bonuses or sanc­tions should have been imposed if they do not meet secu­rity cri­te­ria.
    Profit will moti­vate pri­vate firms to achieve great­ness. NOTHING moti­vates gov­ern­ment agen­cies to achieve great­ness. They nat­u­rally all descent into death traps of bureaucracy.

    Reply
  13. Vincente says:
    April 5, 2006 at 4:40 pm

    Tom DeLay’s cronies wasted no time paint­ing his Democratic oppo­nent as “out of step” with his Houston area dis­trict.
    As an exam­ple, they high­lighted his vote against the cre­ation of the Department of Homeland Security.
    This arti­cle, as well as look­ing at the TSA deba­cle, leads me to won­der why that seems so ‘out of step.’ I don’t think wast­ing money on inep­ti­tude is so crazy.
    This infor­ma­tion has given me a fan­tas­tic idea: find con­gress­crea­tures who voted against the cre­ation of DHS and send them boxes of money.
    On sec­ond thought, I don’t think I’ll take that big of a hit to my wal­let as a result of this doctrine.

    Reply
  14. Jaye says:
    April 19, 2006 at 7:39 pm

    The ulti­mate G. Man AKA FBI agent was J. Edgar Hoover! Sure he was gay and wore female clothes but he was the best! Modern day Feds are always polit­i­cally cor­rect, inse­cure at work, fear­ful of los­ing their jobs, have higher then nor­mal alco­hol, drug and mar­riage prob­lems because they can’t reveal their true feel­ing and can’t talk about their jobs. They are take charge, intel­li­gent, per­fec­tion­ists but are sus­pi­cious and dis­trust­ful of out­siders and inflex­i­ble! These peo­ple need help! Especially after they missed the Fla. 9–11 pilots who did not want to learn to take off or land! Think J. Edgar peo­ple! Peace. Jaye

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      It is sort of puzzeling that a room filled with highly trained US Army...
      Zandor
    • Keep it Simple
      Dear Big Daddy; Your last post is a laugh. You carried 100 lbs for 20 miles?...
      Zandor
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      All the Muslims in the USA should be immediately rounded up and shot. We...
      Zandor
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
      Yeah, and every president since Reagan has proposed a Mars...
      jmatt
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
      Awesome. Now to be a *real* military contract we have to spend $40...
      jmatt
    • Keep it Simple
      Anybody who went to basic training will never forget about weight. Like...
      Big Daddy
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
      It had been a while since I came by the site- and now I...
      Mod
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      In DTI this article is credited to Sharon...
      Wembley
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Jews wasn't a threat for anyone, that's why this was a tragedie
      A.g.
    • Quick-Deploy 120mm Mortar
      The 120 is mounted in the back of a mortar track and...
      SSG Knapp 11C3O
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage