Growing up in the System:

John McCumber

John McCumber is a cybersecurity executive, retired US Air Force officer, and former Cryptologic Fellow of the National Security Agency. In addition to his professional activities, John is a former Professorial Lecturer in Information Security at The George Washington University in Washington, DC and is currently a technical editor and columnist for Security Technology Executive magazine. John is the author of the textbook Assessing and Managing Security Risk in IT Systems: a Structured Methodology

Related Post Roulette

25 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    Nice essay.

    Part of the problem is that it feels like it was possible to have a guess as to what the basic foundations would be for “two decades from now” for centuries… but, recently, those guesses have become more and more worthless.

    In 1948, what would have been good advice for a teen? Well, sure. A, B, and C.
    In 1968, what would have been good advice for a teen? Well, sure. B, C, and D.
    In 1988, what would have been good advice for a teen? Well, sure. C, D, and E.
    In 2008, what would have been good advice for a teen? Well… E and F… D used to be important but it might not be anymore…

    Things are speeding up.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird says:

      Another part is the way people say “oh,well you X? Well, I didn’t X, I guess that means it’s all about X.”

      You had a college degree, I didn’t, guess that means it’s all about college degrees.
      You had a STEM degree, I didn’t, guess that means it’s all about STEM degrees.
      You went to an Ivy League school, I didn’t, guess that means it’s all about Ivy League schools.
      You did an internship, I didn’t, guess that means it’s all about internships.
      You’re white, I’m not, guess that means it’s all about being white.
      You’re a man, I’m not, guess that means it’s all about being a man.

      And, of course, then there follows a rule saying it can’t be all about What It Was All About, and there needs to be documented proof that it’s not about that.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to DensityDuck says:

        “Learn to Code” was *GREAT* advice for a teen 10 years ago.

        Now I look at GPT-3 and I don’t know whether it’s still going to be.Report

        • Oscar Gordon in reply to Jaybird says:

          Learn to code is still good advice, but not in the same way it was 10 years ago.

          Kinda like how learning spreadsheets was great advice 20 years ago, but 10 years ago it was expected knowledge for any white collar job.Report

        • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird says:

          Honestly? I think that management and communication are better skills than anything technical. Because machine-shops come and coding-houses go, but you’ll always need someone to figure out what problem ought to be solved and write up the plan for how to solve it.

          Like I keep saying, “you kids better figure out how to like word problems and group projects, because the main thing you do as a grown-up is do group projects to solve word problems, and how good you are at that determines how much money you make.”Report

          • Oscar Gordon in reply to DensityDuck says:

            You aren’t wrong, but neither am I.

            Being able to code up a script or macro is pretty basic these days.Report

          • superdestroyer in reply to DensityDuck says:

            Managers who do not have the respect or knowledge of the workers are a dime a dozen and usually fail.Report

            • DesntiyDuck in reply to superdestroyer says:

              “Management positions are a reward for technical skill” is how the Peter Principle was invented.Report

              • When I worked at Bell Labs decades ago, after they promoted you from Member of Technical Staff to Supervisor they sent you to five days of “charm school.” Also known as “care and feeding of MTS.” Few people backed out at that point. Enough people backed out at some point later that there was an official transfer category called “retreat.”

                I put up with it for two years before retreating. I was highly rated as a supervisor, but it just wasn’t much fun. All managers got a monthly summary of recent transfers. The month my retreat was on the list I got phone calls from department heads I didn’t know congratulating me for making that choice, and lamenting that they couldn’t because their technical skills were out of date.Report

            • Oscar Gordon in reply to superdestroyer says:

              Not really. Managers who fail to respect the knowledge and experience of the workers will fail, but managers do not need to have that knowledge themselves.

              I’ve worked for managers who only had a very basic understanding of what we do, but who did understand how to delegate tasks, secure resources, handle the politics, and run interference when appropriate.Report

  2. Oscar Gordon says:

    There are still too many people of my experience (we don’t like to say ‘age’) trying to apply their “system” to today’s problems and today’s jobs.

    Yes.

    Lots of less experienced people have wholly bought into the myth that what worked for their parents and grandparents should still work for them, as if “The System” was static even though everything else is changing. Despite daily evidence to the contrary, they want the system of yore, and they somehow want social policy to enforce it.

    PS, I know what you mean about making the military work for you. It was a bit of advice one of my uncles (former USAF) gave me before I left for basic, and he pointed at his own brother (not my dad) as what not to do.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      But they aren’t wrong, though? I mean, if someone else did the things that they did, they’d have the same success in life.

      The issue there is that they followed a path, and to get where they ended up they had to start in a particular place. And sure, you can stray from a path, but if I don’t start in the same place that you did then I won’t end up in the same place that you are now…Report

      • Oscar Gordon in reply to DensityDuck says:

        I’d say that the expected starting place is a foreign country.

        My grandfather could graduate high school and get a middle class job doing physical labor, and learn additional skills on the job to gain advancement.
        My father could do the same, but some school was expected for advancement.
        I was expected to have a diverse skill set before starting the middle class job.
        My son will be expected to have a different, possibly larger skill set.

        High school hasn’t kept pace.Report

        • superdestroyer in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

          One should always remember that 1954 was the first year that more than 50% of 19 y/o had graduated from college. It took longer for 50% of blacks or Latinos to have graduated college.

          I have always thought that the first internet boom is why people have so many career problems. The U.S went from an economy where employers invested in employees to an economy where employees invest in themselves and the emplyers are look for a “good fit.”

          A job hopping economy is great in the boom times for workers but is lousy in a downturn/recession.Report

          • High school rather than college?Report

          • Oscar Gordon in reply to superdestroyer says:

            I always found it interesting that we want employers to invest in employees, but we don’t express that through the tax code.

            If I get work to pay for school, I have to pay taxes on the cost of tuition as income. Or my employer does. Somebody has to pay taxes on that. If someone has to pay taxes on it, then I’m betting there isn’t any tax benefit to paying for employees to take external classes.Report

            • Employers can deduct up to $5,250 per employee per year for college tuition expenses. There are multiple deductions and credits that can be applied on individual returns. At least one of those no longer applies in 2021.Report

              • Oscar Gordon in reply to Michael Cain says:

                $5250? That’s it?

                As for the individual, if I pay the tuition, I can deduct it, but if I get reimbursed, I have to pay taxes on that income. Last I checked, the deduction != the tax.Report

              • Yeah, clearly it’s in a student’s interest to have their employer pay the school directly rather than reimburse. As I recall — it’s been a number of years since I was in a position to notice — all of my employers who paid tuition sent it directly to the school.

                $5,250 would cover six hours per calendar year at the state engineering school a few miles up the road from me. I suppose there are people who work full time and could do more hours. I don’t think I could have.Report

              • Oscar Gordon in reply to Michael Cain says:

                What I’ve seen is that, over the past 10+ years, a large number of large employers went from having generous education benefits to very restrictive ones. So either the tax code changed for the worse, or it failed to adapt to the changing landscape. Given the rise in tuition, my guess is it failed to adapt.Report

            • superdestroyer in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

              It is more than formal external schooling. There is in-house training, certifications, skills building. But these days, most companies do not seem capable of teaching anyone to run the point of sale system, how to answer the phone, or how to speak to a customer.Report

              • Oscar Gordon in reply to superdestroyer says:

                In house corporate training (not OJT) is hit or miss. Most companies do not have pedagogy and curriculum development as core skills, so they farm it out. The companies who get hired to develop the training are also kinda hit or miss, because (IMHO) they are responding to a customer that is not the consumer (i.e. the person contracting and paying for training is not the person who will be taking the training).

                Add on to that the fact that in-house training is generally not a credential that has value outside the corporation. So if you take a training, and don’t have associated work experience, the training isn’t worth much.Report

              • Yup to all of the above. 40-some years ago when I started at Bell Labs, every new systems engineer took Engineering Economics for the Bell System. There was a published textbook. What you learned was 40 years worth of the Bell System: AT&T, Western Electric, the Labs, and a whole list of operating telephone companies. Lots of specifics, like which states allowed which end-of-study conditions, how to structure things so cash flowed around the places where taxes were levied, etc. An extensive curriculum in all sorts of disciplines was taught in-house. After a few years, one of the questions that got asked when management was doing performance review was, “What have they taught?” (In my case, nonlinear optimization and some guest lectures on exotic forward-looking switching technology.)Report

              • Geez, am I old. How did that happen?Report

  3. superdestroyer says:

    Yes, thanks. Sorry for the mistake. 50% of Americans have not graduated with a four year degree.

    What is important is have any type of credential that is hard to replicate. Think about an MD degree helps one be affluent but being a neurosurgeon helps even more.Report