At 12:21 PM 16/11/2015, Marghanita da Cruz wrote: >The article seems to say that the Mal doesn't like the draft strategy. The >bits about the >public-private partnership are probably the giveaway (no pun intended).
Hmmm -- Ah, so they want more private funding involved? Or more private participation? I can see the need for private orgs as well as public to tighten security. Military grade security is I think only available right now to govt? It's not my area, but I remember early issues around strong encryption and the DSO against having it available outside military/gov usage. Was an EFA issue Greg Taylor was across. And yet, it seems it must be, or something similar, if there is truly a 'national interest' test. It's all moot to us plebs anyway since none of it will be released so once again we won't know what is being done. Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia jw...@janwhitaker.com Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker Blog: www.janwhitaker.com Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
