Japan's Cyber-Security Minister Has "Never Used a Computer"

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,004
Japan appointed a new cyber-security minister last month, but his qualifications are up for debate following a recent admission: Yoshitaka Sakurada told a committee of lawmakers this week he “never used a computer” in his life. Sakurada, who will be overseeing cyber security for the 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo, suggested the lack of computer experience won’t be a problem.

A politician from the opposition Democratic Party, Masato Imai, whose question had prompted the admission, expressed surprise. "I find it unbelievable that someone who is responsible for cyber-security measures has never used a computer," he said. But Mr Sakurada responded that other officials had the necessary experience and he was confident there would not be a problem.
 

focbde

Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
545
In reality it's not a problem. His job is to organise and wrangle those who DO have the knowledge.

Someone with zero knowledge of a subject is less dangerous than someone with a little bit.
 

Eickst

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
1,866
At that level of an organization the leadership skills are more important. How many CIO's out there are truly up to speed on everything going on in the IT department and what they are using
 

naib

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
1,284
In reality it's not a problem. His job is to organise and wrangle those who DO have the knowledge.

Someone with zero knowledge of a subject is less dangerous than someone with a little bit.
completely! he just needs the authority, the funds and access to the right people.
Too many times I see managers who have risen from the trenches get bogged down with implementation specifics to design a solution right there and then.
 

sfsuphysics

I don't get it
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
13,875
Is it much better in the US? Not to say "the US sucks too" but rather, we need younger people in politics. Not to replace all politicians with kids, but there really are areas where we do need fresher perspectives and understanding.
Something about Equifax's chief of security being inept right before the largest data breach in US history comes to mind
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rahh
like this

Lakados

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
1,946
Honestly this is probably for the best, at that level they need a project manager not an implementor, they need somebody who can coordinate people and budgets and keep things within expectations his roll is going to be 90% accounting either financial or time. He can simply appoint project leads to work under him who will work in their specialized tasks of security. procurment, networking, software, ... etc.
 

Krenum

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
15,823
You a funny man... He has gotten more good things done in the little time he has been in office than the last 3 presidents combined.
images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTr2oKB8ReAzOHXuxqKgCULm-Rq_qFr1SN1xRoCpmNIHENvxxeQJA.jpg


Some people can handle it, some people just sit behind their keyboard spewing BS.
 

Joust

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
3,210
I'm not saying specialized knowledge is strictly required to be a successful project manager. However, to have zero - and I mean zero - understanding of the underlying process is inappropriate.
 

Mega6

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 13, 2017
Messages
2,745
That's ok, my bosses never know shit about computers either but they always call the shots. Flipping a coin would provide better decision making in IT.
 
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
682
Does it really matter? Being able to use Windows is hardly a qualification anyways and it's not like the other countries' cyber cars are 1337 H4X0R5.
 

MRAB54

Gawd
Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
848
I'm not saying specialized knowledge is strictly required to be a successful project manager. However, to have zero - and I mean zero - understanding of the underlying process is inappropriate.
I've seen people with little technical knowledge lead tech projects successfully. It happens more than you would think. And sometimes, it's better that way as long as the person up top listens and fights for what the minions are saying.
 

BloodyIron

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
3,439
Lol, how good can the hiring be if the leadership can't even tell who's good from bad? No confidence.

As long as he's hiring people that, you know, have used computers ... they should be okay. This still sound ridiculous though.
 

Yaka

Gawd
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
613
i am not sure this is such a stupid thing, most of the top brass in IT industries are pricks. this guy if he is rock solid would possibly doing what he should be doing, unlike most other guys in this job
 

Lith1um

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
2,829
One more example of the older generating getting in the way of the younger generation. They've had their time, they've had their chance for decades, time for the old fucks to move out of the way.
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
Well he can't be much worse than most IT "Managers" who sit at the top of company security. It's not like a major credit agency wouldn't use a music major as the head of IT security.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/09/19/equifaxs-top-security-exec-made-some-big-mistakes-studying-music-wasnt-one-of-them/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1bd3f59a876e

As I said before, most of government is clueless when it comes to tech (forming policy or protecting it) Their heads are too stuck high up managing instead of understanding implications as they don't have understanding of their work. (ie: Struts, SMB V1, or Heartbleed)

Even educated people who try to sound the alarm about security problems, can get put into the backlog and forgotten.

Like most companies, they think security is a secondary issue and expense only. Government is worse.

If you are looking for a secure future get into one of the following fields:

1. IT Security/Cyber Security
2. Artificial intelligence
3. Rapid prototyping and 3D Printing/Fabrication techniques
4. Cloud based web services
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dekoth-E-

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
7,599
In reality it's not a problem. His job is to organise and wrangle those who DO have the knowledge.

Someone with zero knowledge of a subject is less dangerous than someone with a little bit.
The problem with this idea is that his complete and lack of knowledge makes it impossible for him to determine if those giving him information are in fact giving him correct information. The whole mentality of "you don't need to know the job to lead it" is a terribly outdated methodology that has been proven time and again to be exploitable.
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
The problem with this idea is that his complete and lack of knowledge makes it impossible for him to determine if those giving him information are in fact giving him correct information. The whole mentality of "you don't need to know the job to lead it" is a terribly outdated methodology that has been proven time and again to be exploitable.
Several times I have explained technical problems I have encountered with my work and there are pros/cons/risk to each approach. I got a lot of glazed over looks because they don't understand the issues I'm talking about. If I explain the risk and something goes wrong, I did my job because I said there were risk. But that responsibility sits on my boss's head because I have informed him of said risk if he understands it or not. If he gave approval, that's not my fault.

I have asked for a "risk factor/confidence level" on every ticket we handle to let everyone know that work on some items is risky. It absolves me of any responsibility if things don't work out perfectly. I know management has full access to that field when they approve work every 2 weeks. Not only do we discuss said implementation risk during planning, but also at weekly upper management meetings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Eickst

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
1,866
The problem is tech people explaining technical issues in a technical format to people who lack the understanding of the tech being discussed. You have to be able to translate IT and cybersecurity related issues in to 'business speak'.
 

Dead Parrot

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
2,705
^This^ One of the most useful required classes I had to take while getting my Computer Science degree was a 3000 level English class called Technical Report Writing. Hated it at the time. Targeted at technical folks writing for managers. A few points: Keep sentences at Noun Verb or sometimes Noun Verb Direct Object. Limit use of Passive Voice. Limit use of compound sentences. Limit use of technical terms. Keep paper short. Managers have limited attention span.
 

nightanole

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
2,013
^This^ One of the most useful required classes I had to take while getting my Computer Science degree was a 3000 level English class called Technical Report Writing. Hated it at the time. Targeted at technical folks writing for managers. A few points: Keep sentences at Noun Verb or sometimes Noun Verb Direct Object. Limit use of Passive Voice. Limit use of compound sentences. Limit use of technical terms. Keep paper short. Managers have limited attention span.
"Tell them what you are going to tell them"
"Tell them"
"Tell them what you told them"
"Never read from the power point"
"Never provide additional information in the power point"
 

Exavior

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
9,671
The problem is tech people explaining technical issues in a technical format to people who lack the understanding of the tech being discussed. You have to be able to translate IT and cybersecurity related issues in to 'business speak'.
Depending on what you are explaining that can be good or bad to convert it and just have people that can talk business talk. There are many times where yes you want / need to be able to take techno babble and convert it into normal talk and that is fine for management and everyone involved. Sadly there are times where non technical people start trying to direct how technical people should be doing something or what a project should be and you are forced to instead make them understand the technical side to get them to understand a topic to stop thinking stupid things. I have had to stop a few meetings as those that have no business trying to direct technical things had some "great idea" and had things been allowed to continue from IT / technical consultants or from people who have no business trying to make true technical choices we would have been in trouble. At which point you explain everything as needed and hope that you can get over 50% of it to sink in.

otherwise you end up with a meeting where somebody who it hired as a technology consultant thinks you can splice 5 fibers together and the light will magically just make its way around so that any cut to one of the 5 fibers will automatically fix itself and route light around the other 4 paths in a way that you can make a very simple light mesh that ensure all customers have an internet connection that can never go down. Water can do that so why can't light? it isn't doing anything but shinning down a glass pipe anyway so that is the most logical way to design a city wide fiber network. Right?


we don't need to derail this with political BS.
 

Burticus

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,163
Just appoint a magic 8-ball instead. Actually go ahead and do that for all politcal offices, including all of DC
 

M76

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,259
You a funny man... He has gotten more good things done in the little time he has been in office than the last 3 presidents combined.
List please, I'm not being sarcastic, I'm not from the US, I have no idea what actual policy changes ha made. That part doesn't carry over the ocean.
 

cyclone3d

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
13,262
List please, I'm not being sarcastic, I'm not from the US, I have no idea what actual policy changes ha made. That part doesn't carry over the ocean.
1. Exposing the liberal media to a much larger number of people for what they are... a wing of the leftist/communist/socialist democratic party. They don't report news.. they try to make up stories and hope everybody just believes them. And then those who don't , they pull the race, bigot, sexist, whatever card.

2. North Korea

3. Getting countries to start having real fair trade deals instead of US exports being the brunt of tariffs.

4. Jobs - lowest unemployment rate in years and years. Lowest unemployment rate for Blacks/African-Americans , Hispanic-Americans, and Asian-Americans ever.

5. A Lot of harmful regulations are now gone.

6. Tax cuts

7. Obamacare individual mandate penalty gone (You must buy health insurance or you will be fined - since when is is OK for the government to force you to buy something you don't want/need?)

8. Moved US Embassy to Jerusalem - this had been promised by multiple previous administrations but never done. This was huge.

9. Cracking down on illegal immigration

For a list of 52 things listed by the White House as of September of this year, see here:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/list-white-house-touts-53-accomplishments-woodward-ignored
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
Top