3 ms·

I know some of the people involved, and named in this article. So do many other people on HN. I pitched my startup to one of these zoomers just a few months ago

I know some of the people involved, and named in this article. So do many other people on HN. I pitched my startup to one of these zoomers just a few months ago. I can tell you that whatever this is, it isn't that kind of cronyism corruption. We can do better than such accusations, and that's what the person you are replying to is asking for.

throw16180339 2y ago
Trump is provably corrupt, so why should I give his accomplices the benefit of the doubt?
- adastra22 2y ago
  Well for one, they don’t come from Trump or Musk.
  - throw16180339 2y ago
    They're taking orders from bad actors, it's absurd to assume good faith.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      Why do you assume they are taking orders? This organization is not regimented.
      - throw16180339 2y ago
        Why would I assume otherwise? They aren't neutral observers from a trusted third party. Neither Musk nor Trump has a track record of honesty, and both have used their power for personal gain. A recent example is Musk moving NTSB announcements to Twitter. From what I can tell, the apparent purpose of DoGE is to benefit Trump and his allies financially, weaponize funding against opponents, and dismantle parts of the government they oppose. Musk’s preference for young engineers may stem from the same logic the military uses with young soldiers — they tend to be more obedient and less likely to push back.
paulproteus 2y ago
Since you know the people in question, do you have any ideas? I am honestly mystified myself and hopeful someone who knows the people in question can shed some light.
- adastra22 2y ago
  Do you have specific questions? I really don’t think it is complicated. They’re doing what they say they are doing: instrumenting up the government to see what it is doing, and reorganizing it from the ground up to be more efficient. So far all their actions are in line with this. It’s like a creditor-initiated bankruptcy proceeding. An agent comes in and stops all transactions, audits the assets and liabilities, and comes up with a plan. That’s what they are working on right now. I’m trying to be objective in my description. I’ve personally worked for the government before and I think they are being hopelessly naïve in thinking that the government can fixed in this way, and also appear to be dangerously ignorant of the law (or counting on executive pardons). But I do t think there is any intentional malice or corrupt intentions here.
  - blactuary 2y ago
    They know absolutely nothing about running the government or administering these programs, and these idiots are pushing to prod in a system that controls 1/5th of the US economy.
  - paulproteus 2y ago
    Gotcha. The reason I was mystified is that the budget is written by Congress, so I would guess a phone call to a leader in Congress with a desired budget number would do the job. Given that this doesn't seem to be the plan, I couldn't tell if maybe they had some other goal. I hope that explains how someone could be mystified.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      It is not the budget that is the issue to them, except maybe in the total size. I'm sure they think it can be done cheaper. Rather it is how the money is spent that they are looking at. That's within the executive branch's authority, not Congress.
Evil_Saint 2y ago
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Nothing these people are doing is transparent. They're doing shady stuff in the shadows as fast as they can. Which is exactly the way you do things when they're not above board legally or ethically.
- justonenote 2y ago
  Whatever you think about Musk, he is a lot more transparent than other big donors and people who vie for influence in the USG. He is an idiot at times for sure, but he is an idiot publicly. It's insane to me that people on the so called left are going to bat for the status quo, the status quo that protects bureaucrats and lobbyists and friends giving friends contracts and salaries.
  - computerthings 2y ago
    Someone saying extremely stupid things in public, just making shit up and punishing those pointing that out, doesn't strike me as "honest", it strikes me as heavily disordered. And starting this stuff on a Friday night is the opposite of being transparent or welcoming scrutiny. Also: > Thomas Shedd, a Musk-associate and now head of the General Services Administration’s Technology Transformation Services (TTS), told government tech workers in a meeting this week that the administration plans to widely deploy AI throughout the government. Shedd also said the administration would need help altering login.gov, a government login system, to further integrate with sensitive systems like social security “to further identify individuals and detect and prevent fraud,” which employees identified on the meeting as “an illegal task.” https://www.404media.co/things-are-going-to-get-intense-how-a-musk-ally-plans-to-push-ai-on-the-government/ https://www.404media.co/things-are-going-to-get-intense-how-... Finally, batting against someone trying to make the status quo worse for his own gains isn't "batting for the status quo". If your house needs renovating, and I stop someone who tries to set it on fire, it doesn't mean I'm against renovation.
    - justonenote 2y ago
      So you prefer corporate speak suits who don't make the mistake of embarrassing themselves in public? Because they don't ever speak in public? Are you honestly telling me you prefer un-named lobbyists having influence, because that has been the status quo. At least we can point the finger at Musk. And yes, I would posit doing and saying stupid shit in public IS more human than what we normally get. Its a pretty normal human behavior to make mistakes, embarrass yourself, lash out, etc. It's certainly more human like behavior than elected politicians engage in where they disclose absolutely nothing and hide behind PR speak approved by a team of 20. I don't really know what your quote is about, seems like grinding a specific gear which I'm not particularly interesting in looking into. But to your final point. The jury is still out on whether Musk acts _exclusively_ for his own gains. Sure he has an ego, but he was also instrumental in bringing EVs to the market (which many of his now opponents were quick to adopt), and at the very least has rekindled an interest in space exploration and so on. I have many misgivings about the man, but at least we can see him. Which is better than the previous status-quo.
freedmand 2y ago
Do you think that there are security or data exfiltration risks with their approach, e.g. putting classified documents/emails into private company's LLMs to summarize information or identify certain ideological motivations? I don't see how they could begin to understand the scope of what they're working with without A.I. assistance.

throw16180339 2y ago

Trump is provably corrupt, so why should I give his accomplices the benefit of the doubt?

adastra22 2y ago
Well for one, they don’t come from Trump or Musk.
- throw16180339 2y ago
  They're taking orders from bad actors, it's absurd to assume good faith.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    Why do you assume they are taking orders? This organization is not regimented.
    - throw16180339 2y ago
      Why would I assume otherwise? They aren't neutral observers from a trusted third party. Neither Musk nor Trump has a track record of honesty, and both have used their power for personal gain. A recent example is Musk moving NTSB announcements to Twitter. From what I can tell, the apparent purpose of DoGE is to benefit Trump and his allies financially, weaponize funding against opponents, and dismantle parts of the government they oppose. Musk’s preference for young engineers may stem from the same logic the military uses with young soldiers — they tend to be more obedient and less likely to push back.

paulproteus 2y ago

Since you know the people in question, do you have any ideas? I am honestly mystified myself and hopeful someone who knows the people in question can shed some light.

adastra22 2y ago
Do you have specific questions? I really don’t think it is complicated. They’re doing what they say they are doing: instrumenting up the government to see what it is doing, and reorganizing it from the ground up to be more efficient. So far all their actions are in line with this. It’s like a creditor-initiated bankruptcy proceeding. An agent comes in and stops all transactions, audits the assets and liabilities, and comes up with a plan. That’s what they are working on right now. I’m trying to be objective in my description. I’ve personally worked for the government before and I think they are being hopelessly naïve in thinking that the government can fixed in this way, and also appear to be dangerously ignorant of the law (or counting on executive pardons). But I do t think there is any intentional malice or corrupt intentions here.
- blactuary 2y ago
  They know absolutely nothing about running the government or administering these programs, and these idiots are pushing to prod in a system that controls 1/5th of the US economy.
- paulproteus 2y ago
  Gotcha. The reason I was mystified is that the budget is written by Congress, so I would guess a phone call to a leader in Congress with a desired budget number would do the job. Given that this doesn't seem to be the plan, I couldn't tell if maybe they had some other goal. I hope that explains how someone could be mystified.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    It is not the budget that is the issue to them, except maybe in the total size. I'm sure they think it can be done cheaper. Rather it is how the money is spent that they are looking at. That's within the executive branch's authority, not Congress.

Evil_Saint 2y ago

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Nothing these people are doing is transparent. They're doing shady stuff in the shadows as fast as they can. Which is exactly the way you do things when they're not above board legally or ethically.

justonenote 2y ago
Whatever you think about Musk, he is a lot more transparent than other big donors and people who vie for influence in the USG. He is an idiot at times for sure, but he is an idiot publicly. It's insane to me that people on the so called left are going to bat for the status quo, the status quo that protects bureaucrats and lobbyists and friends giving friends contracts and salaries.
- computerthings 2y ago
  Someone saying extremely stupid things in public, just making shit up and punishing those pointing that out, doesn't strike me as "honest", it strikes me as heavily disordered. And starting this stuff on a Friday night is the opposite of being transparent or welcoming scrutiny. Also: > Thomas Shedd, a Musk-associate and now head of the General Services Administration’s Technology Transformation Services (TTS), told government tech workers in a meeting this week that the administration plans to widely deploy AI throughout the government. Shedd also said the administration would need help altering login.gov, a government login system, to further integrate with sensitive systems like social security “to further identify individuals and detect and prevent fraud,” which employees identified on the meeting as “an illegal task.” https://www.404media.co/things-are-going-to-get-intense-how-a-musk-ally-plans-to-push-ai-on-the-government/ https://www.404media.co/things-are-going-to-get-intense-how-... Finally, batting against someone trying to make the status quo worse for his own gains isn't "batting for the status quo". If your house needs renovating, and I stop someone who tries to set it on fire, it doesn't mean I'm against renovation.
  - justonenote 2y ago
    So you prefer corporate speak suits who don't make the mistake of embarrassing themselves in public? Because they don't ever speak in public? Are you honestly telling me you prefer un-named lobbyists having influence, because that has been the status quo. At least we can point the finger at Musk. And yes, I would posit doing and saying stupid shit in public IS more human than what we normally get. Its a pretty normal human behavior to make mistakes, embarrass yourself, lash out, etc. It's certainly more human like behavior than elected politicians engage in where they disclose absolutely nothing and hide behind PR speak approved by a team of 20. I don't really know what your quote is about, seems like grinding a specific gear which I'm not particularly interesting in looking into. But to your final point. The jury is still out on whether Musk acts _exclusively_ for his own gains. Sure he has an ego, but he was also instrumental in bringing EVs to the market (which many of his now opponents were quick to adopt), and at the very least has rekindled an interest in space exploration and so on. I have many misgivings about the man, but at least we can see him. Which is better than the previous status-quo.

freedmand 2y ago

Do you think that there are security or data exfiltration risks with their approach, e.g. putting classified documents/emails into private company's LLMs to summarize information or identify certain ideological motivations? I don't see how they could begin to understand the scope of what they're working with without A.I. assistance.