Badgering people for classified information

taxiya · Sep 1, 2022

dasCKD said:
I really don't think that'll be happening in a very, very long while if it ever happens at all. A lot of people have pushed Patchwork WAY too far with this and it would be completely unreasonable to ask them to come back after what happened in the last few pages. If some J-20 engineer or pilot was getting heckled on reddit or some other American-leaning platform constantly about giving up confidential information, I'd expect them to react the exact same way and wouldn't be expecting them to come back.

The only thing we can really do now is learn from this and, if we ever get someone with insider intelligence on this forum ever again, to never ask them to put their bloody careers, livelihoods, and potentially their lives at jeopardy just to win some internet argument! We lost what I consider to be an invaluable member of our community today and I'm doubtful we'll ever be getting them back.

BMUFL said:
I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if at all. After all, apparently someone here tried to bait him into committing a federal crime.

If I were him, I would also stay away from the place that tried to trick me into a long prison stint and career suicide.

Shame. I was hoping that I could learn more from his effortposts, but I'd rather not see him in a federal pen.

I am not going to dispute whether he is what he said he is by saying something like "worked or working in US IC". But here is my thought about any person in IC.

A person working in not only intelligence community but every sensitive areas would not and should not have responded to so many posts in the conversation that would risk a leak. He or she should only ask questions of the interesting subject but giving no assessment. Being unable to control the mouth and ego to win an argument would have failed him to get his job in the first place.

The first day in PLA every soldier is to memorize "Don't look, don't listen, don't say anything that you are not authorized". That principle should apply everywhere.

sequ · Sep 1, 2022

Blitzo said:
Trust me, I'm very tempted, but ultimately it isn't against the rules for someone to be "unable to read the room".

That said, the moderators are watching this and the episode may not yet be concluded.

I liked the discussions you had with him.

Don't feel guilty to dish out some temporary leaves to those loudmouths who are responsible for this mess even if it's technically all according to the rules.

latenlazy · Sep 1, 2022

latenlazy said:
Are canards superior to traditional configurations in the supersonic regime? Well...sort of. It's more precise to say that they provide some beneficial attributes to designs that want to optimize supersonic performance, but those benefits aren't only attainable with canards, and depending on how you're employing and what you're doing with that particular feature, the converse, that the way you're using those canards may not provide those benefits, can also be true. What canards do really nicely for designs that want optimal performance in the supersonic regime is that as you get into the supersonic regime, the aerodynamic center (the centerpoint where the lift force is pushing on the plane's body) will tend to shift backwards. This increases the leverage arm of the canards relative to where the aerodynamic center is in lower speed regimes, which can improve their control authority. Furthermore, a shift in the aerodynamic center during supersonic flight can also lead to natural pitching deviation from level flight, so you need to "trim" your control surfaces to keep the nose level, which can induce further drag. Longer lever arm means less trimming for pitch authority.

I forgot to add/clarify that one of the benefits (I’m deliberately avoiding the use of the word advantage here) of canards developing a longer lever arm at supersonic regimes is that this assists supersonic maneuverability. A consequence of the aerodynamic center shifting backwards in supersonic flight is that the lever arm for tailplanes get shorter, reducing their control authority. This is not a property that is prohibitive and can’t be designed around however. The F-22 probably benefits tremendously from TVC here, but you can also affect this property by adjusting things like your static stability margin, getting inventive with your control laws, etc.

latenlazy · Sep 1, 2022

taxiya said:
I am not going to dispute whether he is what he said he is by saying something like "worked or working in US IC". But here is my thought about any person in IC.

A person working in not only intelligence community but every sensitive areas would not and should not have responded to so many posts in the conversation that would risk a leak. He or she should only ask questions of the interesting subject but giving no assessment. Being unable to control the mouth and ego to win an argument would have failed him to get his job in the first place.

The first day in PLA every soldier is to memorize "Don't look, don't listen, don't say anything that you are not authorized". That principle should apply everywhere.

You’d be surprised at what people who have security clearances are or aren’t allowed to talk about. There are two general rules of thumb about what you can discuss. The first is that operational details are the most sensitive and they’re basically the key focus in terms of maintaining discretion. The second is that anything your counterparties know you know or have fair basis to know that you know is pretty fair game to discuss openly. Either way Patchwork isn’t actually from the IC. He’s more IC adjacent.

Overbom · Sep 1, 2022

Well that sucks big time. Patch-senpai's posts have been very informative as they were clearly coming from a pro (still remember that banger of Tomahawk posts lol)

Hopefully he can be convinced to come back

And by the way, can (long) comparison discussions get banned once and for all in premier military threads from now on? The only thing they cause is bringing up heated arguments from both sides and eventually derailing the thread.

One side says I got access to confidential data to base my analysis on(logical), the other side says "don't believe you, show me the money" (logical but in very poor taste when knowing that this is a federal crime for the other party), and next thing you know is that you are basically going circles with the "discussion".

dasCKD · Sep 1, 2022

Overbom said:
Well that sucks big time. Patch-senpai's posts have been very informative as they were clearly coming from a pro (still remember that banger of Tomahawk posts lol)

Hopefully he can be convinced to come back

And by the way, can (long) comparison discussions get banned once and for all in premier military threads from now on? The only thing they manage to do is bringing up up heated arguments from both sides and eventually derailing the thread.

One side says I got access to confidential data to base my analysis on(logical), the other side says "don't believe you, show me the money" (logical but in poor taste when knowing that this is a federal crime for the other party), and next thing you know is that you are basically going circles with the "discussion".

I'm very much a junior member, very new to the forum, and so I have very little sway in all of this. That said, I would personally be very much for having a rule like that. This thread is, first and foremost, about the discussions of J-20s and, with all of the classified information on both the J-20 and any comparable systems like the American or Russian 5th gens, any discussion regarding their comparison is just navel gazing. Most of us don't know nearly enough, and those who do know can't speak on the vast majority of it. Going forwards, I think this is a good policy for the forum.

siegecrossbow · Sep 1, 2022

taxiya said:
I am not going to dispute whether he is what he said he is by saying something like "worked or working in US IC". But here is my thought about any person in IC.

A person working in not only intelligence community but every sensitive areas would not and should not have responded to so many posts in the conversation that would risk a leak. He or she should only ask questions of the interesting subject but giving no assessment. Being unable to control the mouth and ego to win an argument would have failed him to get his job in the first place.

The first day in PLA every soldier is to memorize "Don't look, don't listen, don't say anything that you are not authorized". That principle should apply everywhere.

Chinese security standards and US security standards are completely different things. Remember how the crashed F-35C images got leaked from multiple angles?

taxiya · Sep 1, 2022

latenlazy said:
You’d be surprised at what people who have security clearances are or aren’t allowed to talk about. There are two general rules of thumb about what you can discuss. The first is that operational details are the most sensitive and they’re basically the key focus in terms of maintaining discretion. The second is that anything your counterparties know you know or have fair basis to know that you know is pretty fair game to discuss openly. Either way Patchwork isn’t actually from the IC. He’s more IC adjacent.

The scary part is that you think your counterparts know you know, but they don't. By discussing, you tell them that they had a leak to plug. The loop of mind game is endless. Just joking.

So my thought is that unless there is a specific purpose of deception project, don't say a word.

Staedler · Sep 1, 2022

I do see points against "meaningless arguments and inappropriate provocation of members" and "(...) conveyed in a way that minimizes provocation" in the rules.

You make your point that you don't agree with Patchwork's post due to lack of evidence and that's that. Once you pull that card, the conversation's over. There's no way to meaningfully continue without leaking classified information and thus committing a federal crime. What followed was just pointless and bad-faith badgering.

Mohsin77 · Sep 1, 2022

latenlazy said:
But realistically most assessments you can gather from indirect intel work only gives you a floor in an opposition’s capabilities. You’d need far more direct intelligence to figure out ceilings.

Well, you can infer ceilings via deductions, and also espionage, but yea there will always be some assumptions.

I'm sure he knows that, as all SMEs do. Things just got heated and people tend to dig in their heels when that happens.

The problem is that 'platform vs platform' arguments are just silly to begin with. A single platform is a drop in an ocean of interconnected operations, and this is especially true when the systems become as complex as those employed by China and the US. So any debate on J-20 vs F-22 completely misses the forest for the trees.

BMUFL said:
I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if at all. After all, apparently someone here tried to bait him into committing a federal crime.

So don't get baited. Have more self control.

(yes, i know my hypocrisy level is 100 right now lolz)

Badgering people for classified information

taxiya

Brigadier

sequ

Major

latenlazy

Brigadier

latenlazy

Brigadier

Overbom

Brigadier

dasCKD

New Member

siegecrossbow

General

taxiya

Brigadier

Staedler

Junior Member

Mohsin77

Senior Member