full-disclosure - Professional Groups

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <200401131947.40195.ka@khidr.net>
From: ka at khidr.net (Ka)
Subject: Professional Groups

Hi all,

the question is not wether that "union to be" does
the right or the wrong thing. What this group is going to
do is to be determined by it's members anyway.

The question is wether to let others decide in our
field of profession or decide ourselves.

That is it's a matter of growing up and not of being right.

Many instituations have been (and are) on the power trip
(or prestige, or money...). Dependant behaviour and thinking
patterns have been the norm. The justification for politics 
(including union politics) have been the famous inability
of the "masses" to decide for themselves. But the institutions
keep on representing, guiding and overpowering it's
members and citizens.

The present society is against individuality and individual
decision making. And that is a positive feedback circle --
I'd say a vicious and not a beneficial one.

We need not fight others. We simple have the expertise
to improve the overall IT situation and thus help others
as well as ourselves.

Discussion and diversity of standpoints is part of the game.

Greetings
Ka