The value of the CISSP is that “brain dumping” is very ineffective in passing this exam. Even Microsoft has done a better job at measuring experience and performance in their exam offerings. If brain dumping becomes the defacto method by which a candidate achieves any certification, then that certification is pretty useless to the industry as it ensure no valid baseline of knowledge.
Well stated , and I am in agreement with you that "proof of concept" does, and should in fact be more representative of an individuals actual capabilities. I actually work with individuals that actually believed that they could just change certification paths by just taking what they thought would be an easier exam only to find out that was not the case. Proving that one has the prerequisite knowledge is only part of passing an exam. In certain instances an individual may face the possibility of having to actually perform a task or tasks proving they can actually perform under pressure. What are your thoughts with regard to the current state of exams to actual proficiency levels the industry is currently experiencing. I ask this question because I am sure that many of us discussing topics and issues of concern know individuals that can do the jobs in the industry with few certifications. Likewise those that have higher level certifications however, cannot correlate the knowledge into the actual organizations strategy and mission. I agree with you in that experience and knowledge both should be demonstrable. Anyone can go on google and grab turn-key programs, scripts and the like and make the claim they hacked into something or accomplished some herculean DDOS/DOS. I am honestly right there with you and agree with your thought processes and statements.
I am not going to concede that the younger folks are are much smarter. I do concede that they have many more avenues for receiving information. It would be a shame for a prodigy today to be less than the prodigies of our day. There's so much more information available by which one can compare and contrast - the epistemology of human learning!
Ahhh, there it is. What is the difference between being smart, intelligent and wise.
I also, like you will not concede that mere youth has an advantage over those of us with years of experience in our repertoire. Yes, agreed, they do have advantages with respect to the avenues available to them that should both ease the learning processes and enhance the capabilities of their conceptual understanding of subject matter. I am however somewhat perplexed by the lack of self-initiative and the term I have being hearing recently "Fake it till I make it", which vexes me to no end. Please sir, really? Epistemology?
You and I both know like many who visit these types of sites, and aspire to do more with less, understand the meaning of the word. However, we all know that many today have a hard time getting by any words with more than 3 or 4 letters or emoji's. I do applaud you for doing so as it will only peak the interest of those of us who do not know the meaning.
I think your style and flair for stating the obvious is again, "right on point."
Introduction of the cat of science to cavort amongst the pigeons of opinion:
Gah! Twitchy iPad post Syndrome...
To broaden the scope of our studies in epistemology I’d say that the vast preponderance of studies show on average kids are significantly smarter. I’ve been in the workforce for over thirty years and this does seem to be the case.
OK the first twelve plus were mostly in the army, so I might not have most perspective but baselining my school days in the seventies and eighties I have to say the current crop are smarter and wiser than our cohort.
I do find this comforting.