[simple-thoughts]

The idea that people who are close to power are “in on the secret” and thus are more correct that people who aren’t doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It’s a religious idea that extends back to the earliest gnostic cults.

I’m sure it feels good to you to feel close to power, but those feelings are because you feel powerful by association. It does not mean what you are doing is right or just.

[ritwikgupta]

There’s no feeling of power here. I took on this role because the FBI needs people to help them answer these hard questions, and your traditional Silicon Valley crypto bros won’t help.

I was raised in this country post-9/11 and was taught to fear the FBI. I grew up strongly critical of our surveillance state and the overreach of power that was reported upon. The FBI hosting a deeply critical voice inside to help provide insight to their processes seems like a pretty just thing to me.

If you have better ideas, then I invite you to help change the institution. Come “be in on the secret” (a security clearance to guard national intelligence?) and do the right thing.

[simple-thoughts]

Thanks for the invitation to join your club, I appreciate it.

I’m quite familiar with security clearances from close contacts. It’s also inevitable to run into controlled information in the types of work people like me do.

The real secret is that there is no secret worth keeping. Secrets are a way to cover for incompetence - it’s the same mindset as “security by obscurity.” Even the most secret information regarding nuclear weapons has mostly been leaked. The main thing that prevents nuclear proliferation isn’t secrets; it’s international pressure plus tight controls and monitoring of materials.

The only way to fix the FBI is to dissolve the institution- and even that would be an extraordinary challenge because the criminal networks the agency possesses would still operate, just as the networks built by secret police in other countries persisted post dissolution.