8 ms·
I don’t know how this will shake out, but I do worry that these 19-24 year olds, some of whom are known to HN for other achievements, are putting themselves in
by medler 2y ago
I don’t know how this will shake out, but I do worry that these 19-24 year olds, some of whom are known to HN for other achievements, are putting themselves in real legal jeopardy.
Edit: by the way, this post isn’t off-topic. It is about the activities of the US Digital Service (now known as Doge), and the exploits of young hackers who came up through top tech companies. It has implications for information systems security, especially as it relates to Silicon Valley culture.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago[flagged]
- maxerickson 2y agoThey are identified in the linked Wired article...Good job though, you are keeping on top of things.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago[flagged]
- maxerickson 2y agoYes, the condescending tone was intentional. I'm pretty sure that the article is widely linked on both sites, so to answer your question, "lots".
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoAnd the entire popular subreddit is now blocked after being invoked by (f)Elon, and a retweet by the Prosecutor from DC. You can f'off with your condescending bs.
- justin66 2y agoThey're not pseudonymously posting on Reddit or something, they're working in the federal government. The concept of "doxxing" does not apply.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoWhen people are creating lists including who their parents are, their parents jobs, etc. it kind of does in my mind. My bad.
- dbalatero 2y ago[flagged]
- ian-g 2y agoIn my mind, there are a number of instances online where people (read: men) are acting like entitled princes, and the one thing that gets them to back off is making their families aware of what's going on. Considering that these six are almost certainly peak internet people, I can't say I entirely disagree with trying to make sure their families know what they're doing. And so those family members know who to blame if data is leaked, potentially like the bank account details stored in the treasury payments system.
- freedomben 2y agoJust to make sure I understand what you're saying and the underlying principle and how it might apply. You support internet mobs (and eventually IRL mobs) harassing innocent people who happen to be related to somebody else? Do you agree with everything your relatives do? Are you willing to be held to the same standard? If you brother/sister/son/father/uncle/nephew/whatever does something I don't like, can I publish your personal information and get an internet mob to call and threaten your employer?
- viccis 2y agoWhen people can't be legally held accountable, then why are you surprised that there are those trying to hold them accountable via extrajudicial means?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- archagon 2y agoI don't necessarily approve of this action, but... a key to a peaceful life is to not piss off too many people at once. If you decide spit on a hundred million people, you're not gonna like it when a fraction of them spit back. Break the social contract at your own peril.
- minimaxir 2y agoFrom a journalistic standpoint, it's entirely fair to report on these 19-24 year olds, and it is not doxxing to do so. They are quite literally now involved in the US government, and are consenting adults making the rational decision to involve themselves in real legal jeopardy.
- bko 2y agoI guess that's good. It's interesting that we're just now learning the names of the people that hope to disrupt these agencies, but we don't know exactly who, or even how many, of these agencies existed. In other words, there are these critically important agencies that I didn't even know existed, but they're basically the glue that holds together our democracy. Who runs these agencies is not important, what is important is that they continue to run as they have in the past and anyone looking to disrupt that should be thoroughly investigated.
- electriclove 2y agoIf you believe things have been run well at these agencies (that you didn’t even know existed), that would explain your position. Imagine someone who believes that things have not been run properly. Now imagine half the country feeling this way.
- __loam 2y agoThe proper forum for reforms is congress, not steamrolling your way through the federal bureaucracy.
- maxerickson 2y agoYeah, probably. Why does their jeopardy concern you more than the apparent lack of legitimate authority to do what they are doing?
- medler 2y agoIt doesn’t really. Obviously the alleged security breach is egregious and if they’re committing crimes they should be prosecuted. But given that they’re relatively young, part of me wonders if these guys are being exploited by Musk and Thiel and will be scapegoated if the political winds start blowing another way. But that makes no difference to their criminal liability.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sebzim4500 2y agoTrump pardoned the J6 guys for trying to kill the vice president, surely he'll pardon these guys for whatever bureaucratic rules they are breaking.
- electriclove 2y agoI thought Marco Rubio is acting director and has given them authority. Is this untrue? Why do you say apparent lack of legitimate authority?
- comex 2y agoSome of the key actions taken or threatened by DOGE are at least arguably illegal without permission from Congress, such as dismantling USAID, offering "deferred resignation" firing employees without due process, unilaterally stopping payments to agencies or individuals, and some smaller ones. Beyond that, there is the FACA lawsuit challenging the organization of DOGE itself; the administration has partially mitigated that by making Musk a special government employee, but no word on the rest of DOGE.
- Tadpole9181 2y agoWhy are you concerned? They're adults and know this is blatantly illegal and are serving their lord anyway. They don't even have the pleasure of deniability since the government officials literally stepped in, physically blocked them, and told them they weren't allowed. Personally, I hope they get what's coming to them.
- jjtheblunt 2y ago> blatantly illegal genuine question, not sarcastic: what specifically is blatantly illegal, violating what law?
- afavour 2y agoThey are (according to the accounts given) accessing confidential government information they don’t have security credentials for.
- bdangubic 2y agothere’s this guy named Donald who just might pardon whoever is committing whatever crimes are being committed…
- kelnos 2y agoI'm sure he will. But that doesn't refute the assertion that what they're doing is illegal. It supports it, even.
- afavour 2y agoAll else aside I wouldn’t assume he’s going to. I doubt Trump cares one way or the other if these kids rot in jail. There’s a long, long list of people who thought “Trump owes me” would be a guarantee and got a rude awakening.
- bdangubic 2y agoI doubt Trump cares one way or the other if these kids rot in jail they are doing what he is (in)directly ordering - they ain't going to jail following the orders of the POTUS :)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- johnnyanmac 2y ago> I do worry that these 19-24 year olds, some of whom are known to HN for other achievements, are putting themselves in real legal jeopardy. They 100% are. This is a full blackhat attack on a nation. Did they take no ethics class? (software or otherwise)?
- aswanson 2y agoThe one kid just graduated high school. So, unlikely.
- zb3 2y ago[flagged]
- electriclove 2y ago[flagged]
- __loam 2y agoThey are working for Elon Musk.
- electriclove 2y agoWho is working for Marco Rubio (Secretary of State) in this case
- viccis 2y agoMy experience with ethics classes is that they usually just teach you good ways to justify whatever you want.
- wyager 2y agoIf you get your ethics from some class you took in college, you definitely shouldn't be given authority over anything important
- beAbU 2y agoThey are 19-24. They never completed college.
- justin66 2y ago> I do worry that these 19-24 year olds, some of whom are known to HN for other achievements, are putting themselves in real legal jeopardy. I worry that the law will not hold them accountable.
- archagon 2y agoIf not the law, then perhaps social consequences will.
- guelo 2y agoNah theyll have pardons if they ever get into trouble. That was part of the reason trump pardoned the j6ers, to let all his minions know that they have free rein to commit crimes.
- euroderf 2y agoThat's why they need OPM: So they can run off a giant listing of DOGE-droids and tear it from the dot-matrix printer and stamp every page with a big rubber stamp saying "Pardoned! D.J. Trump"
- monero-xmr 2y ago[flagged]
- afavour 2y agoI’d go as far as to say that’s the intention here. They’re fall guys and they’re too naive/arrogant to realise it. People say “oh, Trump will pardon them” but I wouldn’t be so sure, why does he care? Once this is done they’re not of any real use to him so it’s entirely possible he won’t waste the political capital pardoning them. Would be in character for a guy famous for not paying folks who have done work for him.
- latexr 2y ago> I do worry that these 19-24 year olds (…) are putting themselves in real legal jeopardy. On one side you have a handful of arrogant young adults doing the bidding of a couple of wannabe despotic man-babies. On the other you have an entire nation made up of millions of people and with major influence over the rest of the world. I’m having a hard time understanding why your concern lies with the former.
- drysine 2y ago>man-babies If only other babies could launch and land rockets. Call Musk what you want, but he is not a baby.
- nova22033 2y ago[flagged]
- Tadpole9181 2y agoMusk doesn't do that. He bought a company and claims all the credit for it, he's just a rich brat using daddy's blood money.
- theonething 2y ago> He bought a company and claims all the credit for it Dude, Musk founded Space X. It's because of these kinds of ridiculous comments that I find it hard to take the Left (at least the ones on the internet) seriously.
- BLKNSLVR 2y agoI think he's well on the path to reverting to baby status.
- latexr 2y agoA man-baby is an adult man who acts like a baby, e.g. throwing tantrums when they don’t get their way and being overly petty and vindictive, not a literal baby. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Manbaby https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Manbaby It is incredible that I have to explain this and that that is the part you object to. So you’re fine with despots, but “man-baby” is where you draw the line? Either way, your objection makes absolutely zero difference to the point.
- ty6853 2y agoLon Horiuchi could not be convicted for literally sniping an unarmed women with a child in her arms, standing in a doorway of her house threatening no one. Supremacy clause for executive federal employees. They will be fine.
- ansmithz42 2y agoThey are not executive employees, they are Musk employees, not the same thing.
- ty6853 2y agoUSDS is doge. Musk is a federal employee. Presumably they are as well, with USDS?
- dumah 2y agoLon Horiuchi couldn't be convicted because the state's prosecutor dropped it.
- ty6853 2y ago... The feds invoked supremacy clause to squash the case long enough it was too stale by the time it wound through appeals. The special prosecutor did not at all want to drop it and said as much. The supremacy clause was what ultimately killed it, by being useful enough to delay cases to the point they're dead.
- dumah 2y agoThat’s fair.
- venusenvy47 2y agoI don't see why anyone should worry about the people actually committing crimes and being in legal jeopardy. That's the purpose of the legal system. People need to learn that ignorance of the law is not a defense.
- kelnos 2y agoI really don't worry at all for these people. They're adults, even if young, and they've made their choice. Any consequences they suffer will be well deserved. I'm sure Trump will preemptively pardon them at the end of his term anyway. My worry is that these people will never be held accountable for what they're doing. Save your worry for things that actually matter.
- nxm 2y agoSame like Biden and his crew of folks he preemtively pardoned
- kelnos 2y agoSure, if you want to play the whataboutism card, go for it. While I understand why Biden did what he did there, I didn't agree with it. At the very least it sets bad precedent and allows people like you to pretend they have a "gotcha!" argument when they really have nothing.
- ljsprague 2y ago[flagged]
- cleverwebble 2y agothats a wild, and dangerous take
- alfalfasprout 2y agoWhy worry? They signed onto be one of Musk's sycophants are at this point are clearly aware of their actions. You can have accomplishments and still be on the wrong side of history.
- ninalanyon 2y agoWhen I was in that age range (five decades ago) everyone I knew of the same age was politically aware and many were politically active. Has that changed so much that they can claim to be naively unaware of what they are doing?