Renta-spook: GCHQ commercialisation 'is a live issue'

So, another bloody Qinetiq then?

Where all the smart stuff gets given away to the guy who used to bugger the politician in charge at Eton then? Yes, of course the Conservatives should stuff their own and their mates pockets with more cash at the taxpayers expense, can anyone say AEA?

Hasn't taken the tories long to scrounge about for taxpayer built value that they can flog off to their crooked mates has it? Sorry, I meant to say "commercialise", must remember to use the right euphemism for the current smash and grab.

Commercialisation of Big Brother. Oh joy.

"GCHQ could be turned into a technology incubator"

That sounds like a UK version of DARPA, but their focus seems to be narrower, so more spying and data gathering technology.

"The security minister Baroness Neville-Jones told MPs that commercialisation of the Cheltenham spy agency's technology" ... can go fuck themselves? ... no, shame. :(

So how much money will this "commercialisation" plan earn Phorm? ... Will GCHQ simply stream their data (i.e. our data formerly known as our privacy) into Phorm to legalise what Phorm wanted to do all along, which was violate our privacy for their profit?

Plus then the government can give out more of our tax payers money to research more ways to automate keyword detection on all of us to find out who of us use anti-government keywords and read anti-government news articles (like reading what these two faced bastards have been doing in wikileaks related news). Meanwhile the GCHQ / Phorm spying can help these two faced bastards in power to continue to violate our privacy to make them richer and more powerful.

So much for our privacy.

"If RSL had been created in the UK you'd have a bit more money to spend"

Yes, minister.

How does that work then?

Create nationalized companies that can be taxed and/or resold (presumably before being run into the ground through immobilism)?

Have governement open source top-secret stuff and private companies that can be taxed grow like mushrooms around that?

Ah bureaucracies. They always want more money to spend.

Service to the Private Sector

"Cheltenham were to supply a service to the private sector how that might be funded"

I thought GCHQ were already well funded by taxpayers, to provide a service protecting the UK private/public sector against organised criminals and espionage?

Or have I got that complete arse about face?

GCHQ now propose to sell spyware technology and communications intelligence to the highest bidder?

There is something profoundly wrong with UK Security Services at present. They seem to have lost the plot completely.

<Chortle>

Civil servants forging bureaucratic swords into commercial ploughshares?

The problem is that they have little or no notion of the commercial world.

Recall, for example, the Met Office's foray into "weather forecast futures" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5012630.stm). One guess who picked up the tab for that fiasco.

As Mr Lennox-Brown often said, "Don't worry, Lamb. It's only public money!"

"she was uncomfortable disclosing the details"

This, lady, is the idea behind committee hearings - to make you, and the government - 'feel uncomfortable' and come up with the answers.

Such soft questioning!

As for the 'commercialisation' aspects: the UK has always missed opportunities for major inventions with, usually, Americans, making the money. The Americans make use of government facilities for commercial purposes.

The new idea for 'commercialisation' has to be monitored by people external to GCHQ to make sure no unhealthy relationships develop between it and their new clients.

This is a very slippery slope and a hand of restraint should be provided along with a very clear, and public, set of guidelines.

a UK version of DARPA, narrowly focussed* on Colossal AI Fields with Untold Opportunities? ....

..... You're 'avin' a larf, mate. That's not narrow focussing, that's specific targetting.

"The security minister Baroness Neville-Jones told MPs that commercialisation of the Cheltenham spy agency's technology and services is a "live issue".

She appeared yesterday before the Science and Technology Select Committee to answer questions on the government's approach to national emergencies, including cyber attacks.

"You are taking me on to ground, chairman, that we are thinking about," she told the Committee."

Does the security minister Baroness Neville-Jones and GCHQ realise that an additional current "live issue" is Pirating of Spy Agencies for Stealthy Invincible Security Cloud Cover in Virtual Systems of Operation .... and Rogue Command and Control Campaigns. ...... which SMART Use of Present Technologies in the CyberSpace Theatre deliver in Easily Shared Ubiquitous Special Applications of Programming.

And is that/this, CESG penetrations testing the UK Security System for CyberIntelAIgent Strengths and Program Weaknesses to Exploit/Export/Commercialise, or some other Body/Assured Arm.

It is odd to imagine that every country has an Intelligence Chief who thinks that they have a handle on events, whenever all that they really have and may do, is to react to situations elsewhere, rather than lead them from home, with a world wide web following.

Does anyone else offer that SMARTer Servicing of Client and Customer Bases? And Intelligence makes Money. It is therefore most likely not something you sell nearly as profitably as buying into, for then does one always have Prime Current Views from All Sources for the Bigger Pictures in ITs Great Game World Series.

What do you think now of the show you are watching, BB?

* .... Asgard Posted Thursday 2nd December 2010 14:14 GMT