4 ms·

Thank you, I appreciate the advice. I hope you don't mind my asking... but you're a lawyer, and a computer programmer with experience working in a government i

Thank you, I appreciate the advice. I hope you don't mind my asking... but you're a lawyer, and a computer programmer with experience working in a government institution with a rigorous chain of command. Do you have any pragmatic advice for a developer if they are asked to make a database of a minority group for a government institution?

torstenvl 4y ago
Well... as it turns out, that's exactly what I'm doing. In section 549G of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 486 ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/486 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/486 ), Congress directed the military services to track race/ethnicity data for subjects and victims in investigations, nonjudicial punishment, and courts-martial. The stated goal is to identify whether significant racial disparities exist and (I assume) try to figure out why (outright racism? implicit biases on the part of commanders? anticipated implicit biases in reporting? different recruiting pools?) and how to fix it. I don't love the policy, personally, for any number of reasons; but as a military officer it isn't my place to criticize the requirements Congress lays out for us, so I'll leave it at that. But I think the takeaway is this: it really depends on what the data is going to be used for and what privacy protections exist. In the OP link, ATL seems to be assuming the information will be used for nefarious ends, but they almost neglect (only mention in passing) that the data was to be anonymous unless they end up "required to manually look up documents." As a general rule, I don't think public discourse is aided by assuming the worst about others. I find the request to break down the data by month to be interesting. I don't know what to make of that, personally, but in my view it suggests that someone is looking to identify trends over time, rather than trying to build a "registry."
- AftHurrahWinch 4y ago
  I couldn't have hoped for a more informative answer. Thank you for your time.
- jfengel 4y ago
  As a general rule, I don't think public discourse is aided by assuming the worst about others. There's a saying: when somebody tells you who they are, believe them. Paxton has already directed its Department of Family and Protective Services to treat parents as abusers if they even look into their children transitioning: https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/O-MastersJaime202202221358.pdf https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/O-MastersJaime2022... Texas leadership, and Paxton in particular, have put forth numerous other mechanisms to interfere with the lives of trans teens. This is not a case of "assuming the worst". This is a case where very, very bad is already happening, and worse has been clearly signaled.

torstenvl 4y ago

Well... as it turns out, that's exactly what I'm doing. In section 549G of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 486 ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/486 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/486 ), Congress directed the military services to track race/ethnicity data for subjects and victims in investigations, nonjudicial punishment, and courts-martial. The stated goal is to identify whether significant racial disparities exist and (I assume) try to figure out why (outright racism? implicit biases on the part of commanders? anticipated implicit biases in reporting? different recruiting pools?) and how to fix it. I don't love the policy, personally, for any number of reasons; but as a military officer it isn't my place to criticize the requirements Congress lays out for us, so I'll leave it at that. But I think the takeaway is this: it really depends on what the data is going to be used for and what privacy protections exist. In the OP link, ATL seems to be assuming the information will be used for nefarious ends, but they almost neglect (only mention in passing) that the data was to be anonymous unless they end up "required to manually look up documents." As a general rule, I don't think public discourse is aided by assuming the worst about others. I find the request to break down the data by month to be interesting. I don't know what to make of that, personally, but in my view it suggests that someone is looking to identify trends over time, rather than trying to build a "registry."

AftHurrahWinch 4y ago
I couldn't have hoped for a more informative answer. Thank you for your time.
jfengel 4y ago
As a general rule, I don't think public discourse is aided by assuming the worst about others. There's a saying: when somebody tells you who they are, believe them. Paxton has already directed its Department of Family and Protective Services to treat parents as abusers if they even look into their children transitioning: https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/O-MastersJaime202202221358.pdf https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/O-MastersJaime2022... Texas leadership, and Paxton in particular, have put forth numerous other mechanisms to interfere with the lives of trans teens. This is not a case of "assuming the worst". This is a case where very, very bad is already happening, and worse has been clearly signaled.