3 ms·

There may be an error in Schneier's reasoning here: `They are also reportedly training AI software on all of this sensitive data.` Running inference isn't the s

There may be an error in Schneier's reasoning here: `They are also reportedly training AI software on all of this sensitive data.` Running inference isn't the same as training. That said, I don't think this should be flagged, that seems counter free-speech. He's got plenty of other well voted articles here on HN, a lot of HN clearly value his insights. Disagreement would be better expressed as a comment rather than trying to make it go away.

zingababba 2y ago
Yeah I think the articles make it sound like it's just inference. However my theory is the goal is to actually train on what is essentially the output of all of these departments. I honestly think what we are seeing in terms of the tech execution side basically boils down to BigBalls and co. asking an LLM what they should do next. If they ever get prosecuted I'd bet you good money that will be the defense...ROFL.
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
The premise of the article is that DOGE are "the attackers" and preventing them from accessing the data is something "career officials" in the government ought to be doing. That's obviously a partisan framing. The other party's position is that they've just been elected to audit and reduce government waste and direct access to data is necessary to prevent the principal-agent problem in which government officials shape their reports to protect their budgets and activities from undesired scrutiny and oversight. The problem with framing it that way is that it's a request to get flagged by the opposing partisans even if there is some point to be made about maintaining change control etc.
- rat87 2y ago
  There is nothing partisan about resistance to Trump. Resisting illegal acts causing damage yo the nation is not in any way partisan. I'm sure there are Republicans pushing for this as well. Blindly following Trump is partisan. Pretending Trump cares about waste isn't just silly its ridiculous and should be dismissed out of hand.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    > There is nothing partisan about resistance to Trump. Trying to characterize undifferentiated resistance to the leader of a party as non-partisan seems like a stretch. > Resisting illegal acts causing damage yo the nation is not in any way partisan. There are so many laws that basically everything is now illegal. If you want "illegal" to mean something you'd first need a legal system in which a non-zero number of people exist who follow the laws. Choosing which laws to care about in a partisan way is partisan. > Pretending Trump cares about waste isn't just silly its ridiculous and should be dismissed out of hand. This is your non-partisan argument?
    - rat87 2y ago
      > Trying to characterize undifferentiated resistance to the leader of a party Has nothing to do with party, has a lot to do with authoritarianism and opposing destruction of the government. many people resisting Trump have been Republicans far longer then he has and have more invested in it then he does. See former Republican Colorado head of state senate and head of state house https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_Anderson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_Anderson I personally am a democrat and a mildly to moderately partisan one buy opposition to Trump isn't partisan. > Choosing which laws to care about in a partisan way is partisan. Trying to compare laws against Jaywalking or pot to those against government malfeasance and corruption is ridiculous. > This is your non-partisan argument? Yes. Its based on facts not on partisanship. Trump is the most corrupt president we've ever had. He welcomes the government spending stuff on him or his buddies. He sold access ay Margo Largo and not jusy for campaign contributions. Also the closest he got to compromise was on the stupid and wasteful wall debacle, which was not stopped by democrats or concerns about waste but by resistance to even minor concessions wrt Dreamers. I also don't find this part necessarily bad but Trump is less opposed to spending wasteful or not wasteful then previous Republican politicians. The core of the problem might go to his "redefinition" of waste. Where a could of million specifically going towards minority groups or the environment (even when i5 has obvious value) is the swamp, while billions going towards corrupt implementation of a stupid and pointless thing like the wall are not waste.
      - 2y ago

zingababba 2y ago

Yeah I think the articles make it sound like it's just inference. However my theory is the goal is to actually train on what is essentially the output of all of these departments. I honestly think what we are seeing in terms of the tech execution side basically boils down to BigBalls and co. asking an LLM what they should do next. If they ever get prosecuted I'd bet you good money that will be the defense...ROFL.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

The premise of the article is that DOGE are "the attackers" and preventing them from accessing the data is something "career officials" in the government ought to be doing. That's obviously a partisan framing. The other party's position is that they've just been elected to audit and reduce government waste and direct access to data is necessary to prevent the principal-agent problem in which government officials shape their reports to protect their budgets and activities from undesired scrutiny and oversight. The problem with framing it that way is that it's a request to get flagged by the opposing partisans even if there is some point to be made about maintaining change control etc.

rat87 2y ago
There is nothing partisan about resistance to Trump. Resisting illegal acts causing damage yo the nation is not in any way partisan. I'm sure there are Republicans pushing for this as well. Blindly following Trump is partisan. Pretending Trump cares about waste isn't just silly its ridiculous and should be dismissed out of hand.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  > There is nothing partisan about resistance to Trump. Trying to characterize undifferentiated resistance to the leader of a party as non-partisan seems like a stretch. > Resisting illegal acts causing damage yo the nation is not in any way partisan. There are so many laws that basically everything is now illegal. If you want "illegal" to mean something you'd first need a legal system in which a non-zero number of people exist who follow the laws. Choosing which laws to care about in a partisan way is partisan. > Pretending Trump cares about waste isn't just silly its ridiculous and should be dismissed out of hand. This is your non-partisan argument?
  - rat87 2y ago
    > Trying to characterize undifferentiated resistance to the leader of a party Has nothing to do with party, has a lot to do with authoritarianism and opposing destruction of the government. many people resisting Trump have been Republicans far longer then he has and have more invested in it then he does. See former Republican Colorado head of state senate and head of state house https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_Anderson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_Anderson I personally am a democrat and a mildly to moderately partisan one buy opposition to Trump isn't partisan. > Choosing which laws to care about in a partisan way is partisan. Trying to compare laws against Jaywalking or pot to those against government malfeasance and corruption is ridiculous. > This is your non-partisan argument? Yes. Its based on facts not on partisanship. Trump is the most corrupt president we've ever had. He welcomes the government spending stuff on him or his buddies. He sold access ay Margo Largo and not jusy for campaign contributions. Also the closest he got to compromise was on the stupid and wasteful wall debacle, which was not stopped by democrats or concerns about waste but by resistance to even minor concessions wrt Dreamers. I also don't find this part necessarily bad but Trump is less opposed to spending wasteful or not wasteful then previous Republican politicians. The core of the problem might go to his "redefinition" of waste. Where a could of million specifically going towards minority groups or the environment (even when i5 has obvious value) is the swamp, while billions going towards corrupt implementation of a stupid and pointless thing like the wall are not waste.
    - 2y ago