Print 44 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Aug 17 at 8:44 PM

It's to limit the access of human eyes to private data

The U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) said it will get rid of a majority of its system administrators in favor of automation. 

Keith Alexander, the director of the NSA, said that the agency will cut 90 percent of its system administrators and put automation in their place. The reason behind the new move is to improve security and make networks faster.

"What we're in the process of doing - not fast enough - is reducing our system administrators by about 90 percent," said Alexander. "What we've done is we've put people in the loop of transferring data, securing networks and doing things that machines are probably better at doing."

There are around 1,000 system administrators who help operate the agency's networks. But having people run these networks has proved to be troublesome for the NSA after former system administrator Edward Snowden told the press about classified NSA information -- such as spy programs on U.S. and foreign citizens through telephone records and email

The NSA said that automation was an idea presented before the Snowden fiasco, but now that that has happened, it's working hard to roll it out and eliminate human workers that could snitch about private surveillance programs. 

"At the end of the day it's about people and trust," said Alexander. "No one has willfully or knowingly disobeyed the law or tried to invade your civil liberties or privacies. There were no mistakes like that at all."

Just last month, it was announced that NSA programs would be partially declassified and available to the public as a result of Snowden's information leaks. U.S. spy agencies are declassifying documents that shed light on surveillance programs as well as those that will reveal information about the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Source: Reuters

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By 91TTZ on 8/9/2013 2:41:09 PM , Rating: 6
As the government becomes more and more corrupt, they can't be inconvenienced by those who realize that what they're doing is wrong. The government needs machines. Ruthless spying and killing machines that serve the government without question.

By EricMartello on 8/9/2013 4:05:00 PM , Rating: 4
It's funny that the NSA's solution to dealing with issues of morality is simply to remove it from the equation. You know the next step is going to be allowing drones to carry out missions on full auto-pilot because some human pilots may have issue killing a "terrorist" along with hundreds of civilians that "should have known better than to share a building with a terrorist".

We as Americans can't win until we decide that the fight is not amongst ourselves and that it is solely between us and the government.

By EricMartello on 8/17/2013 8:44:27 PM , Rating: 1
Being anti-establishment is hip and everything, but when was the last incident where "hundreds of civilians" were purposely killed to get rid of one (or more) terrorists? Sensationalism only makes you look/sound like a douche.

Let's clarify something. I am not opposed to the US engaging in combat, however I do not want the rules of engagement left up to a machine to decide.

The missiles shot used by drones are not selective. They do not "only kill the intended target" while leaving civilians unharmed. The reports of collateral damage are often classified, because they want you to believe it's not happening. If you drop a bomb to kill one person, but end up killing 50-100 who were in the blast radius, you purposefully killed them all and are responsible for their deaths. You don't get to play with semantics to justify your actions - either accept what you are doing.

By brshoemak on 8/9/2013 9:29:35 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think the government is any more corrupt now than it has been in the past - it's just done differently and out in the open. Buying a vote used to be money changing hands in a dark alley. Now it's a campaign 'donation' by a company and the promise that once their political career ends, they'll have a cushy job at said company - as long as they vote the right way.

There is no difference between the two in terms of the result , it's just that now it's paraded around right in front of our faces now because it's within the confines of the current law. The internet and social media makes it easy to pick up on more of these stories, so it seems like there are many more instances of corruption. The reality is that in the past it was some slimely creep paying someone for a vote, where today the slimey creep is the one who was paid for their vote.

btw, I'm not anti-government - I just think the current system is a joke where greed and the desire to maintain their chair in the political arena has caused politicians to forget they have a job to do, which is to represent the people who elected them in the first place.

By Captain Orgazmo on 8/11/2013 4:16:58 AM , Rating: 2
How about introducing a draft - for politicians. Single terms with representatives chosen by lottery, with a public vetting system to find out their beliefs. Then again, I think of the movie "Jury Duty"...

"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki