"Unless the person is a world-renowned security expert with decades of management experience, and a public track record that goes on for miles — the idea of putting a BA in ‘Music Composition’ in charge at that level and in that kind of company is irresponsible and borderline criminal."
Their LinkedIn profile includes 15 years of experience, starting at IBM, between the acquisition of a degree in an unrelated field and taking a post at Equifax.
As previously discussed in another flagged thread with explicit warnings from HN staff, we cannot determine from their LinkedIn profile alone whether or not they were qualified to be CSO.
This article includes zero investigative reporting or original analysis that could shine light on whether they are qualified. It rehashes the same "Art degrees are for chumps" point, but does so in a thousand word self-promoted post on HN, instead of with a comment on HN.
The author of this post declares their inability to support the Equifax CISO based solely on non-applicable information. Lacking any knowledge about whether or not they're a competent professional at the job they were hired to do, they instead simply declare 'I can't give the benefit of the doubt to someone with an Arts degree'.
The post's author proudly declares that they're a self-taught dropout founder. They then go on to say that, exact quote here, "Most people in Ms. Mauldin’s position would choose to go back to school and get a degree that would compliment the role". By that logic, company founders who want to impact a billion people must attend school first, to get the degree necessary to authorize their widespread impact on the world.
This is not an appropriate response. It is a personal attack upon someone associated with a company, whose skills and contributions and motivations and responsibilities are all presently invisible to all of us. Rather than waiting until relevant information comes to light — or, better yet, following the principles of investigative reporting to seek relevant information — this post simply chooses to declare them a failure based solely on a mismatch between a degree program started 35 years ago and a job started 5 years ago.
This is an unacceptable breach of professional discussion about the news, and is not appropriate content for HN.
1 comment
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 12.3 ms ] threadTheir LinkedIn profile includes 15 years of experience, starting at IBM, between the acquisition of a degree in an unrelated field and taking a post at Equifax.
As previously discussed in another flagged thread with explicit warnings from HN staff, we cannot determine from their LinkedIn profile alone whether or not they were qualified to be CSO.
This article includes zero investigative reporting or original analysis that could shine light on whether they are qualified. It rehashes the same "Art degrees are for chumps" point, but does so in a thousand word self-promoted post on HN, instead of with a comment on HN.
The author of this post declares their inability to support the Equifax CISO based solely on non-applicable information. Lacking any knowledge about whether or not they're a competent professional at the job they were hired to do, they instead simply declare 'I can't give the benefit of the doubt to someone with an Arts degree'.
The post's author proudly declares that they're a self-taught dropout founder. They then go on to say that, exact quote here, "Most people in Ms. Mauldin’s position would choose to go back to school and get a degree that would compliment the role". By that logic, company founders who want to impact a billion people must attend school first, to get the degree necessary to authorize their widespread impact on the world.
This is not an appropriate response. It is a personal attack upon someone associated with a company, whose skills and contributions and motivations and responsibilities are all presently invisible to all of us. Rather than waiting until relevant information comes to light — or, better yet, following the principles of investigative reporting to seek relevant information — this post simply chooses to declare them a failure based solely on a mismatch between a degree program started 35 years ago and a job started 5 years ago.
This is an unacceptable breach of professional discussion about the news, and is not appropriate content for HN.