[chroma]

Interesting article. The CIA sounds like a terrible place to work. No smartphones, definitely no BYOD, and you can't talk to coworkers about your projects. You don't even know if you have old friends who work at the same place.

The benefits and pay are probably decent, but it seems like one could find a better job in the private sector. I guess the restrictions weed out a lot of people who aren't truly dedicated to the CIA's purpose.

[bane]

The tradeoff may be that you might get to work on some of the hardest problems known.

At least harder than your average chat or photo sharing app.

[mindcrime]

to work on some of the hardest problems known

Like "how do we keep our torture camps secret?" and "what happens if we given random people LSD or other psychoactive drugs?"

I'll pass, thanks.

[bane]

I didn't say "morally pure" did I?

[mindcrime]

Fair enough!

[vonnik]

That's a one-sided view. The three-letter agencies may have done horrible things, but they are also leading the fight against even worse regimes, like Russia. There is no moral purity, and insulating oneself from the gray areas of geopolitics is a cop out.

[dsl]

You usually have to put in your years in the government, then move to a defense contractor.

I wouldn't call it a terrible place to work. The work is pretty fulfilling, and worth giving up checking Facebook on your lunch break for.

[BugBrother]

I believe it is painful in high security organizations, by definition. You can often e.g. only use tools which are vetted and stamped OK by a complex and expensive process -- so they are old.

Imho, security is really interesting theoretically, but probably not to work with outside of the academic world.