> Although anecdotal, what I do know is that GCHQ is not stuffed to the gills with super-smart code crackers that are more giftedly geniuser than you is. There are flawed characters and intellectual also-rans making up the numbers. Like any employer (except Google) they have challenges in attracting the best and brightest, but, for the bulk of their work, they don't actually need the truly gifted. Do-as-your-told types will suffice.

> GCHQ can attract intellectual also rans for the 'data entry roles' by hiring locally, the deal being cosy job for life. But, to hire the really clever people needed that they really, really want, what is the hook?

Of course GCHQ don't use geniuses for data entry, and most of the work is mundane and most people don't know much about what the other people are doing or where their work fits in.

What's the hook for the actual geniuses?

Imagine you have Asperger's (or similar), and want to work on interesting math with similar people in a comfortable environment. GCHQ is that place.

Your point about images of child sexual abuse is interesting. GCHQ / CESG provide information to the Government, so it's surprising to see such stupid commentary coming from government about images of child sexual abuse. "Google filters spam, why can't they filter images of child sexual abuse" being one paraphrased example of pure idiocy. I don't know how much information GCHQ provides to the Internet Watch Foundation. I hope there is some channel to push information to them or to law enforcement.