IN KENYA the Agikuyu say, “*Mundu utari nguku ona imwe ndagiriiruo ni gutuithia ciira wa nguku.*” Loosely translated, “A person who does not have even a single hen is not supposed to be elevated to adjudicate over matters poultry/disputes. If more contextually put, a parent is wiser if entrusts their child to the care of another parent than to an individual who does not have a child -- thus lack the full experience of having and raising a child. Is is not common knowledge that kids are such bundles of joy? ;-) Should the child under their watch falter or err, such an individual is likely to impulsively meter out terribly harsh punishments – unlike a fellow parent whom would otherwise hesitate before taking such drastic punitive actions. So much for cultural cross pollination in one day. enjoy, Alex On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:54 AM, Michael Haffely <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > It concerns me that "I don't use email, some would call me a Luddite<http://mashable.com/2012/09/28/janet-napolitano-email/>" > Napalitano wants DHS to have "*greater access to internet and > cybersecurity information from the private sector*" She doesn't have > anything to be concerned about or lose as she isn't a participant of/in > either the internet or the private sector. She also said of a potential > "Digital 9/11" "*There are things we can and should be doing right now > that, if not prevent, would mitigate the extent of the damage" *What > things? What isn't being done? > > I also have doubts about the "Cyber Pearl Harbor that will occur and be as > bad as the September 11 attacks" meme that is thrown about. In my opinion > there has not been a Cyber Pearl Harbor threat model that isn't akin to a > movie plot, and the security community is, for the most part, very good > with sharing/alerting when a weird problem arises (CERT, SANS ISC, Mitre's > CVE, informal lines of communication, etc.). I would encourage United > States citizens to contact your representatives and let them know that this > not the direction we should go, the proposed measures do little to > pro-actively protect the internet as giving DHS access to "internet and > cybersecurity information" will not protect, nor prevent an attack (and > what would they do with it? Raid offices of companies with unpatched > equipment/servers? Force them to upgrade? Require attestation of > compliance?). Information of this type would probably only be useful to > attempt prosecution after an event. > > It's an incomplete thought but just my two cents. > > > > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Carl Smith <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> Homeland Security's Napolitano invokes 9/11 to push for CISPA 2.0 >> >> Link https://rt.com/usa/news/napolitano-us-cyber-attack-761/ >> >> Lou >> > >