16 ms·
DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack
- davidt84 2y agoThey're all subject to FOIA...
- anothername12 2y agoThe article outlines some reporting changes (from OMB to White House chief of staff??) to get around that apparently
- slowmovintarget 2y agoThe article is fairly sloppy and uses lots of scare-quotes, but basically it's saying that communications for the DOGE team will report in to the Chief of Staff making them subject to the Presidential Records Act instead of the general reporting conditions for the OMB. The article also states that 'DOGE is gutting...' when that's not true. They're advising the President, and the President is cleaning house. They investigate, recommend, the President decides, and those decisions get acted on. This is how a task force like this is supposed to work.
- BryantD 2y ago"The President decides..." within the limits of his constitutional powers. Which do not include, for example, impoundment or unilaterally shutting down agencies authorized by Congressional acts.
- lenerdenator 2y agoDepends on if anyone will do anything to stop him.
- rayiner 2y agoPeople are throwing around the word "impoundment" lately. But it has a very specific meaning, and no impoundment has happened.
- code_runner 2y agoonly because the courts stopped it
- BryantD 2y agoJudge John McConnell disagrees with you. His decision placing a hold on the spending freeze cites the Impoundment Control Act as part of his finding that the lawsuit is likely to succeed on the merits.
- jeltz 2y agoYeah, it is always fun when people here know more than supreme court judges about US law.
- BryantD 2y agoTo be fair, he's a district chief judge and I've certainly disagreed with some of them in the past. But at least it demonstrates that the question of impoundment is on the table.
- rayiner 2y agoThat decision applies to a very specific item: congressional appropriated federal support to states. Which is probably the strongest case for an impoundment argument.
- BryantD 2y agoYep. And certainly at the beginning of all this there was reason to think that this was happening. For example, Solar for All grants were paused with no explanation of why or the expected path for releasing them. So, yes, impoundment is a relevant term to use.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- karaterobot 2y ago> They're advising the President, and the President is cleaning house. That may be a distinction without a difference. The reason to have advisors around is so you can rely on them to make a proposal you can sign off on, because they understand your overall vision. If they're not proposing cuts he agrees with, he'll replace DOGE leadership until he finds people who do.
- sitkack 2y ago[flagged]
- paradox460 2y agoExactly. I made this comparison elsewhere, but it still fits. They are akin to the US Chemical safety board. They have investigative powers, but that's it. They can't actually change anything, just issue recommendations. Now, USCSB makes some incredible YouTube videos, I somehow doubt Doge will do the same
- hiatus 2y agoThat remains to be seen. From the same article: > "Just changing the name alone under the Executive Order doesn't affect DOGE's recordkeeping status,” Jason R. Baron, professor at the University of Maryland and former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration told 404 Media in a phone call. “The administration apparently has made a determination that DOGE will be a presidential component subject to the Presidential Records Act. However, that will surely be challenged in the courts in connection with FOIA lawsuits. Under FOIA, it will be for the courts to decide whether under existing DOGE is acting more like a federal oversight agency or as a presidential component that solely advises the President.”
- sitkack 2y agoDOGE is not acting as an oversight agency, they are locking people out of systems and modifying code, so they can't be an oversight agency. Congress needs to do their job here.
- karaterobot 2y agoHere is the distinction: > This would make DOGE a Presidential Records Act entity, meaning records it creates are not FOIAble until years after a president leaves office rather than a Federal Records Act entity, which would make its records FOIAble now. It's how soon you can make a request.
- 9283409232 2y agoI thought the whole point was transparency and auditing? Are you telling me Musk was lying!?! So who watches the Watchmen?
- rayiner 2y ago[flagged]
- ropetin 2y agoWouldn't it be the AGs who recently got 'let go'? And why did you go straight to whataboutism? Just because one person does bad things it doesn't excuse other people from doing the same bad things. You don't see serial killers lawyers arguing, "I know my client killed 17 people, but what about that Jeffrey Dahmer, eh?"
- code_runner 2y ago"there are a lot of unsolved murders out there. aren't those people free? my client should be free too!"
- lenerdenator 2y ago[flagged]
- neets 2y ago[flagged]
- lenerdenator 2y agoI remember that time that my parents got to vote for Nick Civella as the local crime boss and got to confront him, with no consequences whatsoever, at an open meeting about how he was spending the Central States Pension Fund on Vegas casinos.
- cluckindan 2y ago
- lenerdenator 2y ago[flagged]
- cluckindan 2y agoHeads would roll. Literally.
- byroot 2y agoProbably not, but there would definitely be some sort of resistance, strikes, refusal to comply, etc. In France public service employees have a very high level of protection (they're very hard to fire), and are legally allowed to disobey "obviously illegal" orders, I suppose this case would qualify? All of this was implemented immediately after WW2 as a way to prevent a potential authoritarian ruler from using public administrations for nefarious things. So it seems quite fitting.
- code_runner 2y agoI assume that federal employees are also allowed to disobey "obviously illegal" orders, but I suppose the difference is that they can be retaliated against. Its odd that the president can act out of his authority and make orders that illegal, but still be able to fire the people who won't do those things. In the case of USAID workers, its entirely possible that the organization will be explicitly NOT under executive authority (my understanding is that they are a legislative branch creation).... but I guess the executive branch can still order them to stop working and return to the US? Its all very murky
- thaumasiotes 2y ago> In France public service employees have a very high level of protection (they're very hard to fire), and are legally allowed to disobey "obviously illegal" orders This would seem to imply that a French public servant who obeys an "obviously illegal" order is both knowingly (it's obvious) and willfully (there's no requirement to obey) breaking the law. What are the penalties for that?
- jfkrrorj 2y ago[flagged]
- dgrin91 2y agoThe title here is poor. Its not that Slack is subject to FOIA and other systems are not - its that the org structure of DOGE is being transition from being under OMB to directly under the executive office. If they use Slack there it would be presumably not be subject to FOIA.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- cluckindan 2y ago[flagged]
- jarebear6expepj 2y ago[flagged]
- waltercool 2y agoWhat? Why are you protecting Slack business? Even at my company I was in charge to replace Slack because is damn expensive in comparison to other options like Teams or Rocket Chat.
- rhubarbtree 2y agoMore expensive and more better.
- tester756 2y agoIs it? Discord seems to be way better Teams are good enough
- etchalon 2y agoNo one I know who has been migrated to Teams has been happy about that change.
- wkat4242 2y ago+1. The only thing better about teams is that it comes 'free' with Microsoft 365. Though you can now take that without it for about 1.50 per month less. But slack costs a lot more. On paper they can do the same but slack is just so much better in terms of UX. Though i do hate that they dropped the IRC bridge. I have been active in slack communities a lot less as a result. I always have my IRC open but not slack.
- rhubarbtree 2y agoFor companies using teams rather than slack: why not use excel rather than a CRM? You'll save lots of money. Use Google hangouts instead of Zoom. Free videocalling, why worry about quality? It's not clear to me that you actually save money by using worse technology, if it takes more time to do stuff (after you've restarted teams three times to try to get share screen to work, for example).
- viraptor 2y agoPractically, this probably doesn't make a difference. FOIA relies on at least one person in the department to not be antagonistic towards the process. Otherwise they can just make up excuses. That's the standard experience for people sending requests. I don't think anyone from the new DOGE would actually be helpful in responses anyway.
- hx8 2y agoIf the data is on Slack servers, then Slack may be more than willing comply with FOIA.
- vesinisa 2y agoSlack can't just willy-nilly hand over US government data to the public. There's a process that needs to be followed for FOIA requests as some classes of information are just not public. In fact, most of the data on a government Slack server would probably fall under those FOIA exemptions.
- hondo77 2y agoNot when I worked in the US govt. We were told that everything we did in our Slack was FOIA-able. FWIW.
- viraptor 2y agoFOIA requests go to the information owner, not to anyone hosting it. It's not even specific to IT. Paper notes/documents are also covered.
- code_runner 2y agoDOGE is obviously a completely illegal operation, and I really do hope it will be get reined in before they can cause an issue so big that _even trump's croniest cronies_ have to admit what is going on. For someone who claims to love freedom of speech, Elon is pretty quick to determine who can say what, and how much access to _his_ data people have.
- jfkrrorj 2y ago[flagged]
- bpodgursky 2y agoI mean, there are many political leaders who would put Musk in prison in a heartbeat for the DOGE stuff. It's not paranoia. This is separate from "do you think this is illegal", but it's absolutely reasonable, from their perspective, to think that "everyone is after them".
- jfkrrorj 2y agoI know! Maybe this paranoa would be justified, if they would already killed millions and destroyed countries!
- dylan604 2y agoI'm surprised he has not tit-for-tatted with pre-emptive pardons for all of his minions.
- SketchySeaBeast 2y agoIs it actually illegal if it's the pet project of the president, who has been given absolute power by the rest of the government?
- stanleykm 2y agoThe president isn’t a king.
- thr0waway001 2y agoAh ha ha like dogcoin
- yapyap 2y agoMan I’d hate to work in such a volatile environment.
- malfist 2y agoThat's probably part of the goal. Get people to quit and not replace them. One party has been on the "break the government to prove the government doesn't work" warpath for decades now
- the_optimist 2y agoPerhaps revisit your premise prior to asserting malicious intent.
- voxl 2y agoThe biggest problem with the USA is people look at the current state of the government and somehow don't see pre Nazi Germany. If the percentage of these sympathizers is large enough then there is no course correction that will be possible in two years.
- the_optimist 2y agoPerhaps review “The Poverty of Historicism,” which if read carefully, is similar to being slapped with a fish.
- wh313 2y agoPerhaps review "Dialectics of the Concrete," which if read carefully, might ameliorate your smug demeanor. By the way, you failed to address his main point that the US is taking a turn towards authoritarianism, and instead chose to critique a secondary part of his claim. Why is that?
- francisofascii 2y agoI agree. What's worrying is any stable working environment that exists now can become volatile like this overnight. It is more uncommon with Federal employment, but is pretty common in the private sector unfortunately.
- jfkrrorj 2y ago[flagged]
- paganel 2y ago> used by journalists and lawyers to hold government accountable. The journalists from Politico have just been ousted by DOGE has having had received $8 million in annual funding from USAID (another Government-run institution that has been ousted by the same DOGE), so I can understand how come Musk would want to keep DOGE's dealing away from journalists that might see this agency as very antithetic to their (the journalists') material well-being.
- intended 2y agoIf you assume that USAID was evil from the oustset, its easy to conclude that everything its tendrils touched was also tainted. Kinda like evil. But, the sad part is, that this also means its an idea which is impossible to challenge, because you cant trust anyone who counters it.
- paganel 2y ago> If you assume that USAID was evil from the oustset, I'm not "assuming", I know that for a fact. > because you cant trust anyone who counters it. Do you happen to live in a part of the Globe that has been under direct USAID (and NED) influence? Something tells me you don't, I do (I live in Eastern Europe), so allow me not to receive lessons from people who know nothing, absolutely nothing, about this type of organisations.
- intended 2y agoI do! It seems we benefited significantly from them. Who knew. Also, where I'm from was historically on America's shit list. Still benefited from it.
- throwaway173738 2y agoIt would help if you’d share something beyond a bald assertion. The idea of soft power gets used by tons of governments everywhere. Maybe they undertook some evil actions where you live. But they also ship food to places that need it, and they fund infrastructure projects.
- 2y ago
- Aurornis 2y ago> Employees working for the agency now known as DOGE have been ordered to stop using Slack while government lawyers attempt to transition the agency to one that is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, > The messages indicate that, under Elon Musk’s leadership, DOGE is actively taking steps to make sure its communications and records are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, > This would make DOGE a Presidential Records Act entity, meaning records it creates are not FOIAble until years after a president leaves office rather than a Federal Records Act entity, which would make its records FOIAble now. Regardless of where you stand on the topic of cutting federal budgets, the lack of transparency should be alarming to everyone. Broad actions like this should have the utmost transparency, not a team of lawyers doing their best legal maneuvering to keep it out of the public's reach.
- wnevets 2y agoThey should be ordered directly to prison.
- the_optimist 2y ago[flagged]
- adrien79 2y agoBOYCOTT TESLA, TWITTER, SPACEX. SELL YOUR $TSLA STOCK. Do it for America. And for the world. The rest of the planet is watching. America, get your shit together!!
- bdangubic 2y agowas about to hit the international space station for the weekend but imma boycott the shit out of spacex now :) and worry not, anyone owning tesla stock is getting their punishment eventually :)
- andy_ppp 2y agoI can see the Founders of the US now, one of the things they did when setting up the government was organise it so a South African billionaire should be able to take over and reorganise it with zero accountability.
- torginus 2y agoI don't have an opinion on the political aspects of this, but I find the choice of uploading all your data to a central server by default an insane choice, and I hate that this is the default in the modern world. Why can't software come in a box, like it used to - then it can run on a machine that I control, and only talk to machines that I control too. Then it's not a matter of belief and blind trust and hoping against hope that nobody's spying on me - it's the matter of basic common sense and due diligence.
- krapp 2y ago>Why can't software come in a box, like it used to - then it can run on a machine that I control, and only talk to machines that I control too. At some point you will want or need to talk to machines you don't control, because society consists of people other than yourself, and machines that they control. And in this hell of other people, "basic common sense and due diligence" are synonymous with blind trust.
- torginus 2y agoIRC used to work like I described, and it had no trouble talking to strangers. Websites are usually hosted on machines the owner controls, running software the owner controls, yet have no trouble talking to the external world.
- squigz 2y ago> IRC used to work like I described, and it had no trouble talking to strangers. Except for the server, which is usually run on a box you don't control. > Websites are usually hosted on machines the owner controls, running software the owner controls, yet have no trouble talking to the external world. Most websites are absolutely not ran on machines the owner controls...
- torginus 2y agoBut the important thing is in both cases, I have the option of running it like that, if security is important to me. In the case of Slack, Discord or Teams I have to implicitly trust the mothership. In a world where all these companies are eager to hide clauses that allow them to train on your data, and where controversies pop up where Tesla employees share your in-car camera videos among each other, I'd rather have a product where I can limit who I need to trust, especially if I'm running something as sensitive as a government agency.
- 127raf 2y agoAvoiding FOIA is one thing. Why do organizations that handle sensitive information use Slack in the first place? Salesforce gets all the Slack data and can do whatever it likes. This is utter incompetence.
- smb06 2y agoOh they want to eliminate the possibility of public filing a FOIA request. Democracy died in Darkness.
- Havoc 2y agoThis seems to me that there can be only two outcomes here. Either gov gets completely neutered and stops existing in conventional form. Or this ends in treason charges.
- goldforever 2y ago[dead]
- phendrenad2 2y agoThis has nothing to do with FOIA, the article just made up that explanation for engagement.
- nabeards 2y agoLots of Elon apologists in this thread, yeesh.