If anyone here is interested in learning more about Neurotechnology, I co-founded an organization called NeuroTechX which brings together neurotechnology enthusiasts from across the world. You can find out more about us at http://neurotechx.com/
Is this a common thing in the infosec industry? Personally I have known two people who were sexually harassed who work in security. I've also hung out with some and they do seem to have an unrealistic view on the opposite sex.
The more well-known infosec conferences, especially in the US, have a long-held tradition of being a place to show off, do drugs and party. The percentage of people I've known in infosec circles who are also heavy drug abusers easily doubles or possibly triples the general population.
At least that's my 20 years of experience of them.
Crypto absolutely attracts a strange group of people as compared to other disciplines. That includes some people who are very liberal in their definition of consent, almost by definition, which in turn can affect other areas of their life.
[Note: I am not making excuses for their behavior, although I'd hope that would not need saying.]
Are you an academic cryptographer? I'm not, but I'm a practicing crypto engineer, and I go to the occasional conference and workshop. What I've noticed is that crypto is far better about stuff like this than CS and certainly than infosec; I think it's a consequence of crypto being as much a part of mathematics as about computer science.
It's one victim telling the story, enabling other victim to tell theirs. This happens in many communities, not only IT. But the first person to speak up opens the gate for others who experienced it for a long time.
That's one of the reasons it's important to share them. You'd never expect what happened to people you personally know sometimes.
> Is this a common thing in the ~infosec industry~ black community? Personally I have known two people who were sexually harassed who work in ~security~ the black community. I've also hung out with some and they do seem to have an unrealistic view on the opposite sex.
If you think I have a problem with afro-americans, you have a problem with getting the point
I'm curious if it's actually worth keeping high performing people on your company if they create a lot of internal conflict and employee turnover. Have there been studies that have looked into this? Are there HR tools that track this?
This situation reminds me of the Jeremy Clarkson Effect (https://blog.vanillaforums.com/help/how-to/dealing-with-toxi...) where you keep people on board because they are high performers/popular until the point where the amount of damage they cause versus value they provide is too high and must let them go. If, for example, you lose 5 good tech people because of one amazing tech person, is it still worth to have that one amazing person? I feel like if you could quantify something like this, it would be easier to get rid of toxic people.
maybe not an exact match, but the "dark triad" traits are shown to be effective for individual career progress, but negatively correlated to organizational performance. Harvard Business Review did an article ("Why Bad Guys Win at Work") about a few relevant pieces of research in this vein: https://hbr.org/2015/11/why-bad-guys-win-at-work
As a Concordia University Comp Sci student (Located in Montreal) I'm glad to see that they did so well despite the fact that they only attended the MIT hackathon throughout the whole season (and they were only a team of three).
I hope in the future that more Canadian Universities students get involved in events like this as we have an abundance of talented people who have something to prove.
Problem being is that most of these events are hard to get to since they are located in the United States.
