Embrace your inner Geek!

This forum is for discussions about cyber warfare

Embrace your inner Geek!

Postby Twidget » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:47 pm

Here's a good pieceby CDR Heritage in the USNI blog.

I don't want to be a SWO, Aviator, Submariner, SEAL, etc... They all do great things that are needed by our Navy, things that no other designator can do. IWs and others from the IDC are the same, the same in that we are different. We bring unique and valuable capabilities that our Navy cannot do without.

We are bringing in some amazing Sailors into our IDC rates. Unfortunately, as the CDR mentions, we can't have our pick of the litter with new accessions in the officer corps. Those with the greatest aptitude and/or most interest in our communities may be off limits...unless they're broken.

As a primary warfare area that has been growing and becoming more critical, it's unfortunate that don't have the same access to the officer pool as URL communities.

Geeks Rule!
  • 0

Brought to you by the Paranoia Protection Counsel..."We're watching you 24/7 to make sure you're not being followed."
User avatar
Twidget
Moderator
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:40 pm
Location: OCONUS
Reputation: 26

Postby Wolfpack » Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:36 pm

Twidget wrote:Here's a good pieceby CDR Heritage in the USNI blog.

I don't want to be a SWO, Aviator, Submariner, SEAL, etc... They all do great things that are needed by our Navy, things that no other designator can do. IWs and others from the IDC are the same, the same in that we are different. We bring unique and valuable capabilities that our Navy cannot do without.

We are bringing in some amazing Sailors into our IDC rates. Unfortunately, as the CDR mentions, we can't have our pick of the litter with new accessions in the officer corps. Those with the greatest aptitude and/or most interest in our communities may be off limits...unless they're broken.

As a primary warfare area that has been growing and becoming more critical, it's unfortunate that don't have the same access to the officer pool as URL communities.

Geeks Rule!


And the problem w/ OCS is? I would not agree that OCS do not have the greatest aptitude or most interest. Does USNA even teach what the IDC needs or wants? Maybe we need a program like NUPOC (not sure that is how it was spelled). That, and focused recruiting is what will give the IDC the officers it needs.

Only criticism of the article, the URL issue is dead for the near term. I know what he is saying is that we need to move beyond it. We have.
  • 0

Wolfpack
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:14 am
Location: Wash DC
Reputation: 6

Postby Twidget » Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:27 am

I certainly don't have anything against OCS applicants as that was my commissioning source. The problem for our community with regard to accessions applies to OCS, unless I'm misinformed or things have changed since I applied. When I was first applying I was told that if NUPOC would take primacy over over Cryppie or Intel, regardless of the candidate's preference.

The point of my post was that, with the exception of perhaps Special Ops, our warfare area is the only one that has been expanding. However, there is a disparity between the fact that we are becoming more important to the emerging threats that face our Navy, but are not able to compete with URL communities for the majority of officer accessions.
  • 0

Brought to you by the Paranoia Protection Counsel..."We're watching you 24/7 to make sure you're not being followed."
User avatar
Twidget
Moderator
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:40 pm
Location: OCONUS
Reputation: 26

Postby Arkad » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:31 am

Wolfpack wrote:Only criticism of the article, the URL issue is dead for the near term. I know what he is saying is that we need to move beyond it. We have.


I certainly appreciate the criticism. Some may have moved beyond the URL issue, but it was this PROCEEDINGs Article published in OCT that gave me reason to put pen to paper (or fingers on keyboard). At least 50% of those I polled before I wrote the article still believe we must be a URL to be truly relavent. Glad you have moved on, let's do our part to help the others do the same and focus on what is truly important.
  • 0

User avatar
Arkad
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 2:07 am
Reputation: 21

Postby TarHeel98 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:38 am

I guess my concern is not one of "we should be in the URL", but that "cyber should be part of the URL." The ability to incorporate this aspect of warfare into the totality of the operational planning process needs to be something more than a niche project of sorts. Rather it needs to be an established part of the art of combined arms. I am not saying that this cannot happen should IW's (and the rest of the IDC) not join the IDC, but I am not sure how it can happen if those who do the heavy lifting, so to speak, where cyber planning and execution are concerned are not integrated with those who are planning and executing all other aspects of combined warfare.
  • 0

User avatar
TarHeel98
Moderator
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:17 pm
Reputation: 26

Postby CNO Guy » Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:06 pm

Planning and being part of the planning process does not require any URL credibility to be a significantly contributing member or to even lead such an effort. Have done this personally in the past for Cyber and wasn't a URL while doing so, in fact had to expend an immense ammount of time explaining basics to the URLs for both planning and technical aspects specific to Cyber.

Agree with the totality comment, but by focusing on the wrong things we will get the wrong results. URL vs non URL is all a "form" discussion IMHO, and we should all be focusing on the "function" of how we will deliver effects in order to guarantee not only a seat at the planning table, but a spot on the ITO/ATO, FRAGO, EXORD, etc. Making Cyber real requires (to name a few):

- capability development and delivery
- articulation of what those capabilities can do (JMEM development)
- specialized knowledge/experience to ensure we have capacity to plan and execute which is captured in CDR Heritage's Blog post to some degree

The URL discussion while interesting on the surface and applicable to all is not within most people's scope of influence as it resides at the flag level for the most part. That being said, we should change what we can within our immediate scope of control and influence those things outside of it. URL is one of those things that clearly fall into the influence area for most, so let's commit to changing what can now in an attempt to influence larger efforts such as the URL discussion.

To the blog post specifically, I am a huge fan of not only recruiting cyber geeks, but intentionally growing them within the community. Several tools/tours/edcuational opportunities exist that allow that to happen now, but it is not widely accepted without each member who chooses that path accepting some degree of career risk. Personally, the risk doesn't raise that much concern; though mentors and seniors have regularly counseled me otherwise. The more personnel who adopt the cyber geek culture and act on it, the further we will grow toward guaranteeing a seat at the table in the future; however, if we only focus on getting a seat there will be no foundation to allow it mean anything other than symbolic recognition.
  • 0

User avatar
CNO Guy
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:00 pm
Reputation: 21

Postby arvizo » Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:29 pm

Wolfpack wrote:Maybe we need a program like NUPOC (not sure that is how it was spelled).

I came into the Navy as a IW (Cryppie Officer at the time) via a program called Baccalaureate Degree Completion Program (BDCP). I don't know if the program still exists, but it allowed me to choose almost any field (IW, Intel, SWO, SEAL, EDO, others). It was similar to NUPOC but you could apply three years prior to graduation rather than only two.
  • 0

arvizo
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:59 am
Reputation: 8

Postby OmegaMan » Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:55 pm

threadjack

Darn, I was thinking this would be similar to the "Which Sci-Fi Universe Fleet would you like to serve in?" thread over on SailorBob.

and for what it's worth, I pick BSG.

end threadjack
  • 0

OmegaMan
 

Postby COMEVIL » Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:24 am

This is a fantastic post! When I read the article in question I was left with more questions than answers. In fact, while the article was well written, I had trouble comprehending the main point.

CDR Heritage's post, however, left me with no question about what needs to be done. We need to deliver, period. We don't need to reinvent ourselves again. We don't need to shift to the Unrestricted Line. We don't need to create a new designator. We simply need to deliver, then sit back and watch the demand signal grow.

v/r

Comevil
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36


Return to Cyber

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest