Re: Downsizing the NSA

[wlkngowl@unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis)]

On Sun, 28 Jan 1996 02:04:52 -0800, Tim wrote:

[..]
>However, as Phill notes, the NSA and other intelligence agencies are now in
>that most dangerous of positions: a powerful agency or department casting
>about for something to do.

>Spying on citizens and keeping the keys to their private communications and
>diaries is not an appropriate option.

>AT&T is downsizing, IBM downsized a while back, so why couldn't the NSA
>just do the right thing: admit that the Soviet threat is no more,
>congratulate the victors, and downsize by 20,000 employees?

Perhaps they are worried about the implications of putting thousands
of cryptographers into the private sector?

And what if you were one of them? You'd probably have a hard time
using or publishing anything classified.  Not to mention the usual
governmental conflict-of-interest work rules (for low-level employees
the standards of who you can work for after leaving the government is
a lot stricter than if you were a cabinet member).

Just a thought.