3 ms·

It's really not fair to lump all of government in with the NSA. "Helping the US government" in the case of the digital service means things like making it easie

It's really not fair to lump all of government in with the NSA. "Helping the US government" in the case of the digital service means things like making it easier for immigrants to apply for a green card by building a web application that replaces paper forms. What the digital service is actually doing is helping US citizens receive government services more efficiently. Which is completely different from "helping the government" the way you phrase it.

sarciszewski 11y ago
> It's really not fair to lump all of government in with the NSA. Does the US Digital Service hire people who strictly refuse to assist in any way with any of the operations of the NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS, DEA, or any other oppressive agency? If so, I'd reconsider, but I don't think they would hire me under those terms. And if they did, they wouldn't appreciate me saying "Fuck off!" if they tried to assign me to one of the projects to prop up one of these agencies?
- ritchiea 11y ago
  I can't answer that, you'd have to ask them but everyone I spoke to at the digital service said their work was specifically delivering government services to citizens. I don't think they work with the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS etc. It's not a catchall organization that works with every federal government department.
  - sarciszewski 11y ago
    Okay, thanks for the clarification. If I join them and suddenly end up unemployed/homeless, HN will know why.
  - konklone 11y ago
    > I don't think they work with the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS etc. Just a small note, immigration is DHS.
- mdickers47 11y ago
  (Member of USDS) - The answer is no, sorry. We prioritize assignments based on their potential to do the most good for the largest number of people, and do not pressure anybody to work against their conscience. But we can't reconcile rigid individual pre-conceived ideologies with the need to run a coherent and diverse group. Consider the opposite scenario: should we hire somebody who "strictly refuses to assist in any way with providing government handouts to undeserving moochers?" Such a person would be an obvious liability, given current priorities. If I hired the first group and not the second, then we'd become an explicitly partisan and ideological operation, that still has to work with a Democrat administration and a Republican Congress. That's a whole new level of pain that I need like a hole in the head.
howterrible 11y ago
Yes it is fair. During the stasi regime it wasn't OK to work for the government in any capacity, the same goes for a multitude of corrupt governments whose primary end is domination and control of it's citizenry. At this point if someone willing works for the US government they are no friend of mine, because they are actively assisting an institution which flaunts the law, destroys the lives of innocents, tortures without consequence, and routinely murders hundreds of thousands of civilians. That the great Sam Altman shills for such a morally bankrupt entity is revolting and should give everyone pause. The US government clearly has no intention of reforming, providing them any assistance is akin to providing any terrorist organization with material assistance only on a much larger and more devastating scale.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - howterrible 11y ago
    The US government has become practically unresponsive to even the gravest of crimes, such as torture and pervasive surveillance of it's own citizens. Crimes committed by those in power are either ignored, fined a percentage of their profit, or wrist slapped while those who oppose the powerful have their lives ruined. Yes, a morally good person can no longer work for the US government, a threshold into evil has been crossed -- was it acceptable to work for the Stasi, for Mao or Stalin? No it wasn't, and isn't acceptable to assist the US government.
dnesting 11y ago
The broader USDS family is focused on delivering better services. But one area we're starting to focus more on is policy itself. One thing that struck me about the federal government is just how little internal harmony there exists between agencies. Just because the NSA does or says something doesn't mean everyone here agrees with them or even really has to support them. Because the USDS HQ team is located in the White House (and OMB), there exists the ability to engage directly with decision-makers and influence policy and (at least sometimes) the behavior of agencies.
- howterrible 11y ago
  You are so far beyond the looking glass you can't even recognize your own slave mentality. Gotten any transaction over at the white house on prosecuting torture? Thinking that your masters will be so happy you improved IT efficiency that they'll listen to you is mind numbingly naïve, they simply will use you as they would any tool and when you've done your job put you back in the toolbox. Do you think Stalins tailor had much impact, maybe his gardener or chef? You don't stop evil people from being evil by helping them.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

sarciszewski 11y ago

> It's really not fair to lump all of government in with the NSA. Does the US Digital Service hire people who strictly refuse to assist in any way with any of the operations of the NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS, DEA, or any other oppressive agency? If so, I'd reconsider, but I don't think they would hire me under those terms. And if they did, they wouldn't appreciate me saying "Fuck off!" if they tried to assign me to one of the projects to prop up one of these agencies?

ritchiea 11y ago
I can't answer that, you'd have to ask them but everyone I spoke to at the digital service said their work was specifically delivering government services to citizens. I don't think they work with the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS etc. It's not a catchall organization that works with every federal government department.
- sarciszewski 11y ago
  Okay, thanks for the clarification. If I join them and suddenly end up unemployed/homeless, HN will know why.
- konklone 11y ago
  > I don't think they work with the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS etc. Just a small note, immigration is DHS.
mdickers47 11y ago
(Member of USDS) - The answer is no, sorry. We prioritize assignments based on their potential to do the most good for the largest number of people, and do not pressure anybody to work against their conscience. But we can't reconcile rigid individual pre-conceived ideologies with the need to run a coherent and diverse group. Consider the opposite scenario: should we hire somebody who "strictly refuses to assist in any way with providing government handouts to undeserving moochers?" Such a person would be an obvious liability, given current priorities. If I hired the first group and not the second, then we'd become an explicitly partisan and ideological operation, that still has to work with a Democrat administration and a Republican Congress. That's a whole new level of pain that I need like a hole in the head.

howterrible 11y ago

Yes it is fair. During the stasi regime it wasn't OK to work for the government in any capacity, the same goes for a multitude of corrupt governments whose primary end is domination and control of it's citizenry. At this point if someone willing works for the US government they are no friend of mine, because they are actively assisting an institution which flaunts the law, destroys the lives of innocents, tortures without consequence, and routinely murders hundreds of thousands of civilians. That the great Sam Altman shills for such a morally bankrupt entity is revolting and should give everyone pause. The US government clearly has no intention of reforming, providing them any assistance is akin to providing any terrorist organization with material assistance only on a much larger and more devastating scale.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- howterrible 11y ago
  The US government has become practically unresponsive to even the gravest of crimes, such as torture and pervasive surveillance of it's own citizens. Crimes committed by those in power are either ignored, fined a percentage of their profit, or wrist slapped while those who oppose the powerful have their lives ruined. Yes, a morally good person can no longer work for the US government, a threshold into evil has been crossed -- was it acceptable to work for the Stasi, for Mao or Stalin? No it wasn't, and isn't acceptable to assist the US government.

dnesting 11y ago

The broader USDS family is focused on delivering better services. But one area we're starting to focus more on is policy itself. One thing that struck me about the federal government is just how little internal harmony there exists between agencies. Just because the NSA does or says something doesn't mean everyone here agrees with them or even really has to support them. Because the USDS HQ team is located in the White House (and OMB), there exists the ability to engage directly with decision-makers and influence policy and (at least sometimes) the behavior of agencies.

howterrible 11y ago
You are so far beyond the looking glass you can't even recognize your own slave mentality. Gotten any transaction over at the white house on prosecuting torture? Thinking that your masters will be so happy you improved IT efficiency that they'll listen to you is mind numbingly naïve, they simply will use you as they would any tool and when you've done your job put you back in the toolbox. Do you think Stalins tailor had much impact, maybe his gardener or chef? You don't stop evil people from being evil by helping them.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]