14 ms·

Moving on from 18F

362 points by mkeeter 2y ago

stuartd 2y ago
For anyone (like me) who doesn’t know what 18F is: > 18F is a digital services agency within the Technology Transformation Services department of the General Services Administration (GSA) of the United States Government. 18F helps other government agencies build, buy, and share technology products. The team consists of designers, software engineers, strategists, and product managers who collaborate with other agencies to fix technical problems, build products, and improve public service through technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18F
- GeneralMayhem 2y ago
  18F - and its sibling the US Digital Service, before it was eviscerated to become the host for the DOGE parasite - is exactly the sort of thing you would create if you want government to run efficiently. Creating room for well-meaning technical experts to offer their expertise across the government, without being locked into a lifelong public-sector career path, is a fantastic idea. Even at its worst, it's taking work that could otherwise go to beltway-bandit contractors, but in-house, with all the cost and friction reduction that that implies. At its best, it's able to spot cross-agency opportunities that no other agency would see on its own. If you're still on the fence about giving the current administration the benefit of the doubt, dismantling these agencies based on zero analysis is perhaps the clearest possible evidence that "efficiency" is not the primary goal, or in fact a goal at all.
  - monero-xmr 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - atemerev 2y ago
      I would prefer some medicine without vice signalling with particular gestures from 1930s, thank you.
      - UncleOxidant 2y ago
        This is the first time I've seen the term "vice signalling" and it seems to fit. I suspect this is not the last we'll hear of that term.
    - hoten 2y ago
      If we're done having fun with words, would you like to take this opportunity to provide some reason to think this true? Specifically, how DOGE is combatting inefficiency.
      - fragmede 2y ago
        The question is if one is dumb enough to buy Tweets from the DoGE Twitter account as anything resembling reality. There's plenty of "evidence" there for morons to buy.
        hoten 2y ago
        Of course, but to start the uphill battle of calling out the bullshit, we have to at least know which bullshit to counter. For me, the only charitable interpretation of DOGE is that they have accidentally figured out how to spread incompetence (not wholly unfamiliar to much of the government) to the small islands that fended it off (gutting 18F/USDS). The cherry was accidentally firing a chunk of the nation's nuclear experts to save a dime, and then clawing them back. I think any claim of DOGE doing good work has to address those things in a convincing manner (in addition to why the existing processes are lacking; GAO). I haven't seen that attempted by anyone.
      - monero-xmr 2y ago
        How would cutting spending be a parasite? The goal is to cut spending.
        hoten 2y ago
        That does seem to be the goal. But the facade is that it is wasteful spending being cut.
        MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
        The parasitic act is cutting spending while leveraging the position to increase their own revenue. The guy "cutting spending" is getting contracts and tax cuts out of the deal, and killing watchdog agencies and anything else that might try to stop him. It's almost poetically parasitic. He's inside the host, sucking it dry, while killing anything that can get in his way.
    - MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
      The parasites are trying to raise the national debt by 4 trillion USD, to pass on as tax cuts to only the richest people in the country. DOGE is playing whack-a-mole against figures that are 5 orders of magnitude smaller, while ignoring the waste that pads their own pockets.
      - monero-xmr 2y ago
        The ideal world is zero tax. Failing that the minimal possible tax. Paying taxes is not in itself virtuous, nor is spending tax money a good thing. We cut spending, then we cut taxes
        btilly 2y ago
        Let's not cut taxes until after the deficit is zeroed out. Preferably until after the debt is going down, so that the next generation doesn't have to pay interest on our poor decisions.
        MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
        How do we fund road repairs and constructions with zero tax? Medical care for the poor who can't afford medical care or insurance? Public education in general?
        ethbr1 2y ago
        And critically, are these things more cheaply centrally provided by a government? Not providing a medical safety net or social security net seems like it's saving money... until one has to account for the downstream costs those decisions have.
        monero-xmr 2y ago
        If we decide to do these things with tax dollars, then as a society our goal should be the best outcome for the lowest cost. Many seem to have forgotten this
        2y ago
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - mock-possum 2y ago
      That’s its stated purpose, yes, but given whose mouth those statements have come out of, I’m pretty skeptical that that’s going to be the actual outcome. Totally willing to be proven wrong, we’ll see.
  - EnergyAmy 2y ago
    It's astounding that this is crystal clear, and yet you still have people like the sibling commenter trying to find ways of defending Musk. It reminds me of the quote comparing Libertarians to cats: > Libertarians are like house cats in that they are convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand People like that shouldn't be allowed to vote. I don't actually believe that, but it's hard to watch Idiocracy happen in real time and watch low-information people cheer it on.
    - rl3 2y ago
      While a lot of us both relate and agree, I’m not sure the rhetoric is helpful here. If the flame wars are kept to a minimum, the submission keeps trending, and awareness rises. This one in particular is very important for the tech community. I think the crux is that too many people are taking what’s being said at face value. The banner of cost cutting and lean government was chosen because it’s hard to argue with, assuming it’s true and done responsibly - which it isn’t. Randomly firing 200 people that worked at NNSA is one of the most profound examples of this, let alone gutting 18F. For anyone paying attention, it’s indeed crystal clear the move is being used to install loyalists while “saving” an amount of money that’s order(s) of magnitude less than the grift they’ve granted themselves, after cutting the very watchdogs setup to stop that kind of grift. Heck, even the word grift is charitable when it’s more like outright brazen corruption. However, convincing everyone of this difficult insofar that it requires them to a) not take these people at face value, and b) swallow the pill that not only were they wrong for trusting said persons in the first place, but they potentially even voted in the administration that’s doing the damage. Getting people to admit that they were wrong, even to themselves, is pretty hard these days. Hopefully it becomes too obvious to ignore, and that process becomes easier when it’s replaced by a feeling of betrayal. Because if there’s one things American love on either side of the aisle, it’s getting angry. 18F was one of the finest examples of a non-partisan agile tech organization that was highly efficient and effective. It was just trashed it for no good reason at all.
      - foobarian 2y ago
        It's telling that all the cost cutting is happening in the 1% slice of the pie, not the defense slice of the pie. There be dragons most likely.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    Qft. USDS/18F was the correct answer to "Many US government departments have similar needs, but insufficient IT expertise (or authority) to deliver well." To which the obvious solution was to create a center of excellence for those skills, then offer them across the government. Most critically, including paved roads of the "right" way to do things (but which no individual agency was willing to fight to get approved). PS: Fuck DOGE/Elon for having enough hubris so as to think they can do better. Although my guess is Hanlon's razor, with addendum, applies. >> Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. (or ego) To repeat my previous framing of this: it's easy to sell younger technologists on a two step plan to make things better. (1) Destroy the old (2) Build the new. Unfortunately, they don't yet understand the latter is orders of magnitude more difficult than the former.
    - dkhenry 2y ago
      I worked for the USDS in the early days and I am very familiar with 18F, and I don't think your comment tracks. There were lots of issues with agencies using 18F, and not much of the federal IT spend migrated to 18F during its 10 year history, even though most of the products they launched were good. Even USDS teams didn't always take up 18F on its products, and instead would utilize outside contracts for a majority of their projects. Realistically the government needs to do better then 18F was doing and there are many reforms needed to actually have a paved road agencies can drive on.
      - omnivore 2y ago
        The model of 18F changed a lot, none of those products including Login.gov or Cloud.gov were part of 18F, they're all spinfoffs that live within TTS.
      - ethbr1 2y ago
        Appreciate the comment! If you had a magic wand, what are the main problems you would unblock to create better/cheaper/faster government IT outcomes, based on your experience?
        2y ago
- zerocrates 2y ago
  Perhaps more widely known very recently for being the subject of an Elon tweet saying "that group has been deleted," though whether he was referring to 18F as a whole or just those working on the free filing system for the IRS was unclear.
- js2 2y ago
  18F has been discussed on HN quite a few times, though not too much recently: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=18f https://hn.algolia.com/?q=18f Here's its GitHub org: https://github.com/18F https://github.com/18F
- khazhoux 2y ago
  Are there any metrics to show 18F or USDS are strong successes? My impression has always been that it is a well-intended but low-impact effort.
  - tehjoker 2y ago
    Hard to say who's responsibility it is but federal websites have gotten noticeably less shitty over time and I always feel more at ease on a website that obviously had their input.
  - pimlottc 2y ago
    You could always read one of USDS’s reports to Congress to get an idea on what they’ve done: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22report+to+congress%22+%2Bsite%3Ausds.gov https://www.google.com/search?q=%22report+to+congress%22+%2B...
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - itronitron 2y ago
    Like when a state considers itself a global superpower but hasn't had any notable impact on an unremarkably sized rock orbiting an average sized star in a barely noticeable galaxy?
    - hofrogs 2y ago
      [dead]
  - snowwrestler 2y ago
    One of the big wins was login.gov which is modern, easy to use, more secure, and less expensive than the crazy array of ancient agency-specific login systems it was in the process of replacing. What happens to it now, I have no idea. It’s probably going to be scrapped in favor of “login with X”.
bsimpson 2y ago
That's too long for me to read, so apologies if the answer was too subtle for "Find in page…" > I’m not leaving under a “deferred resignation”. > … > Instead, I resigned from my position as a product designer, submitting two weeks’ notice…well, two weeks ago. If they're offering you a buyout and you don't want to work there, why wouldn't you take it?
- steveklabnik 2y ago
  The part you cut out explains it: > (Though it’s possible I almost was; more on that later.) The part from later in the post that explains it: > In a terrible coda, a large number of probationary employees were summarily let go at my agency just before my last day. He wasn't offered a buyout. He quit, and then later, a lot of people were let go. He believes it's probable he would have been one of them had he stayed.
  - linkregister 2y ago
    Everyone in the federal government received an email from OPM entitled "A Fork in the Road", offering the opportunity to receive a buyout in exchange for their resignation.
    - steveklabnik 2y ago
      I actually forgot that 18F is literally part of the government instead of a contractor. Thank you. (I also thought that probationary employees were not eligible for the buyout, but now that makes me want to go check on the accuracy of that.)
      - ericd 2y ago
        Applied to probationary employees as well. I know of one who was there for two days and took it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
bko 2y ago
[flagged]
- gkoberger 2y ago
  You somehow picked an example he didn’t even cite. (And for what it’s worth, my recent DMV experiences have been delightfully painless… a large part thanks to 18F)
- sophacles 2y ago
  What does the dmv have to do with the federal government?
  - bko 2y ago
    TSA? Security theatre? > In 2015, TSA agents failed to detect prohibited items in 67 out of 70 tests, resulting in a 95% failure rate Does this change your opinion on the bureaucracy? https://www.vox.com/2016/5/17/11687014/tsa-against-airport-security https://www.vox.com/2016/5/17/11687014/tsa-against-airport-s...
    - EnergyAmy 2y ago
      The TSA needs to be abolished, but that has no bearing on 18F or other government agencies.
    - sophacles 2y ago
      I don't know that I expressed an opinion on the bureaucracy, nor an the TSA, security theatre or anything else. I don't think any of those are related to my question about why the DMV is relevant to Federal policy. (Note - I asked because the DMV is a per-state agency and the discussion is about Federal policies)
j2kun 2y ago
Expecting this article to get flag-killed, as all politically-inclined submissions critical of Elon seem to be these days.
- jonas21 2y ago
  All politically-inclined submissions supportive of Elon are also quickly flag-killed. Perhaps it's for the best.
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    > Perhaps it's for the best. It is not. We bear a lot of the responsibility for creating this situation, we shouldn't be able to just turn away from it now that it ended up where it was always going to.
  - anon7000 2y ago
    It's definitely very political. But also very relevant to us, because Elon is applying tech business practices to the federal government. Move fast & break things (great for R&D, awful for organizations that are supposed to be stable), mass-layoffs (and subsequently re-hiring after you figure out what broke), thinking that there's no value in the legacy systems (and not keeping anyone around who might have known that), etc. It's important for us to realize that while tech has been an economic powerhouse, our culture and management practices aren't all good. Esp when it comes to tech CEOs who have been very successful, have a big ego, and think they can do better at anything.
    - someothherguyy 2y ago
      Especially technology CEOs of long term unprofitable companies that were propped up to succeed by government programs favoring research and development. Now that they have a place in the market, it is time to remove those programs for everyone else who may attempt to compete.
  - jauntywundrkind 2y ago
    > All politically-inclined submissions supportive of Elon are also quickly flag-killed. Funny, I haven't seen anything remotely commendable about Elon get submitted in months. Doesn't seem like a real issue.
simonw 2y ago
Musk tweet on 18F: "That group has been deleted" - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1886498750052327520 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1886498750052327520 Among other things, it frustrates me that Elon's work here has echoes of "what happens if we bring in experts from the tech world to help make government IT more efficient" while ignoring that that's what 18F did, and it worked really well.
- mambodog 2y ago
  he doesn’t want experts, he wants people who will be subservient to him. expertise would get in the way of that, because experts would likely understand that he has no idea what he’s talking about, and not respect his dictates. see: everyone who knew how things worked at twitter.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    That seems overly reductive. Opposition is more effective when we strongman our opponents rather than strawman them. It's possible (probable?) Elon actually things "his" people are more talented.
    - ryandrake 2y ago
      It is possible, but not probable. The M.O. of the entire administration has been to replace expertise with loyalty. No reason to believe this group is any different. This was also the case in 2017.
    - roguecoder 2y ago
      If so, he is utterly unqualified to participate in hiring or firing.
    - sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
      It's not like this is new behavior from him. He wants people who agree with him and will do what he asks. He doesn't want pushback, and he definitely doesn't want to be told he's wrong. https://www.yahoo.com/news/data-scientist-resigned-twitter-blasted-181505572.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/data-scientist-resigned-twitter-b...
neilv 2y ago
Question for lawyers. I can understand and respect someone leaving on principle, or someone simply unable to tolerate an immediate situation. But if a government employee is feeling under occupation by a destructive invader, and possibly expecting to be terminated, do they keep significant legal options open by waiting it out, rather than resigning, if they can tolerate to do so? For example, let's say that significant elements of legislative or judicial branches decide not to play along with the current maneuvers, and take corrective action. Or let's say that employees are able to sue for reinstatement, with damages? Or to sue rogue individuals personally, in some way that pierces whatever immunity the rogues might think they enjoy. Does the wronged person have a better case if they don't resign?
- UncleOxidant 2y ago
  Not a lawyer, but I wonder about this as well though more from the standpoint of trying to stay in there to be a witness to the destruction and to try to do what you can to slow it down. Though in this case, as he was still probationary he wouldn't have had that option. They (DOGE) found out that it's hard to fire federal government employees, but they found the loophole with probationary employees.
- layer8 2y ago
  Not a lawyer, but by resigning voluntarily, you basically relinquish all options regarding keeping the job that you would otherwise have had. You can’t later invoke that you didn’t really mean to resign. It’s also often more advantageous to wait to be let go in order to collect severance pay. (Though likely not for the OP due to his probationary status, and there is also a big question mark regarding pay for the current government layoffs.)
- ajross 2y ago
  All your questions presuppose an executive branch that is bound by the decisions of the judicial branch. This one isn't, or certainly doesn't feel that it is. So the answer is practical, not legal. The control they can exert is the control they can get away with exerting without undue cost. That might involve accepting the results of law suits from disgruntled employees, or it might not. Certainly right now they seem disinclined.
siliconc0w 2y ago
Mandatory service for the government would go a long way to educating the public just want these organizations do and building empathy for the problems they face. There is a significant risk of civil unrest as the competent employees are pushed out and government ceases to be able to function while private companies take advantage of lack of regulation to try and further extract value from captured markets.
- xg15 2y ago
  I think exactly this has been the deliberate strategy of a part of the US' political class for a long time - "starve the beast" and all. This seems like the final culmination of those plans.
  - jjuel 2y ago
    Tell the people the government is inefficient and cannot work as intended. Defund said government so it doesn't work as intended. Privatize the work and profit. A playbook as old as time. Except they are doing it bigger and more brazenly than ever.
- DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
  > Mandatory service for [...] building empathy I understand your thought-process here, but I'll say it really doesn't work out like that in-practice. E.g. mandatory schooling certainly didn't make me build-up empathy for teachers and institutions, it had quite the opposite effect in my case.
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    I wonder how one can experience public schooling (20 years ago or now) and not have sympathy for the struggles of teachers.
    - DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
      Oh, in retrospect/hindsight, absolutely. But in-person, when you’re on the spectrum, in the 1990s, when the senior staff put their stock in discipline - not understanding - does not build empathy on either side.
1shooner 2y ago
For those not familiar with the author, Ethan Marcotte literally wrote the book on responsive web design (and coined the phrase). I point that out about because I think it is (or was) relevant that someone with such a place in digital design history had chosen public service.
- reagan83 2y ago
  He didn’t pick “public service” because when an administration didn’t match his political preferences he bashed that admin in this post. That’s not a public servant but a partisan servant.
- micromacrofoot 2y ago
  There are very few people that would be better suited for a role like this than Ethan, any major web company would be fortunate to have him on staff... and the fact that he chose to work at 18F speaks volumes about the work they were doing there.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
eob 2y ago
There was an SF office of 18F -- IIRC it was in the building to the right of the Civic Center park as you looked at it from the Bart stop. They were great folks from every encounter I had with them.
Temporary_31337 2y ago
I think this one is hard to defend but let me tell you a similar story in the UK. Gov uk was redesigned by some of the smartest people and generally I still praise a lot of digital transformation from that era. But after a while people got complacent and not much is happening or improving recently. So in that sense stirring the hive might be a good thing- even if 18F delivered good things in the past. Unfortunately with doge and Musk I don’t really see how something better comes out of the chaos- destroying things just for the sake of it is not good enough plan and basically is missing the second part- what happens after the revolution.
exogeny 2y ago
[flagged]
9283409232 2y ago
I still don't understand what getting rid of 18F accomplished. Someone on HN said they were "openly partisan"[0] but neglected to explain how. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43059187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43059187
- ajross 2y ago
  18F was staffed by a bunch of young tech folks who lean left. That makes them enemies subject to persecution. I really don't think there's any more complexity than that. Expect this kind of thing to be the norm in the future.
  - omnivore 2y ago
    Not young people at all, actually. Mostly mid-to-senior people.
- micromacrofoot 2y ago
  Unfortunately things like accessibility (which 18F provides guidance on) has been rolled into 'DEI' by the current administration, and is therefore a partisan issue. 18F was also designed for remote work, which oddly has become another partisan issue.
- roguecoder 2y ago
  Anything that prevents government contractors from extracting maximal taxpayer dollars for their shareholders is in opposition to current partisan goals. As a result, simply being nerds committed to principles like "software should work" or "government information should be accessible, as required by law" is now considered "openly partisan": https://technical.ly/civic-news/18f-profile/ https://technical.ly/civic-news/18f-profile/
- hooverd 2y ago
  They promoted things like "accessibility", which is woke of course.
- hnburnsy 2y ago
  According to a GSA forensic audit, 18F was losing money, had billing issues, and spent too much time on non-billable activities (52% versus 48% billable). One of the partisan activities referred to was a pronoun replacing slack bot referenced in this GSA report... https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F_%20JE17-001_October%2024%202016.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20... The GSA conclusion was... 1. Establish a viable plan to ensure full cost recovery of ASF funds expended by 18F. 2. Ensure that internal 18F projects have appropriate supervisory review. 3. Implement controls over 18F’s reimbursable agreement process to ensure that work is not performed outside of a fully executed agreement. 4. Ensure that GSA CIO reviews and approves, in writing, all 18F IT-related work performed for GSA internal organizations. 5. Implement a comprehensive review of 18F’s past work to ensure accuracy of all billings. 6. Establish reliable internal controls to ensure that 18F’s future billings are accurate. 7. Ensure that 18F’s billing records are retained in accordance with GSA records management standards.
w10-1 2y ago
Paraphrasing lines not to cross: 1. Working remotely 2. Killing or surveilling people 3. Discussing work with someone outside work The resignation stemmed from the possibility of 3. By contrast, some people stay in their positions or businesses notwithstanding adjudications of fraud, abuse, treachery, etc. Of those two kinds of people, which will most successfully infiltrate and control an organization? (As a hint, Stalin was not a leader but a bureaucrat who managed to oust all the actual leaders, and did Putin with the oligarchs.) I respect the author's choice as the best alternative, and respect his speaking up for the organization. I just wish we could give him a better alternative.
corpMaverick 2y ago
May be an opportunity to find talent for State or City governments that want to create their own digital services agencies?
- omnivore 2y ago
  there are lots of them already, but many more that need them.
jballer 2y ago
To recap: OP resigned because he feared what might happen in a meeting with USDS. It might have required him to kill someone, or explain his work to a contractor. Somehow these are presented as equally-odious propositions. He openly refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of USDS, referring to it as "a so-called 'department'", and neglects even a cursory investigation into whether it may in fact be a legitimate executive agency established by Obama, staffed by government employees with requisite clearances and authority. It's wild to me that so many smart people think the White House should be boxed out of the day-to-day operations of GSA and OMB, whether by law or tradition, despite being undeniably responsible for their actions.
- rat87 2y ago
  Yes people don't want Trump corrupting the government. Corruption is bad. Power is easy to abuse. Checks are hard when a president doesn't care about the law or the constituon kr the damage he does to the country. There's a reason several departments are supposed to be at arms length from the president. Many of these reforms happened after Nixon. Now assuming the country survives it's clear we need something more. Possibly some administrative agencies need to be placed under the judicial branch to avoid executive corruption. Also impeachment needs to be much easier, arguably we need something like a vote of no confidence where a malcious president can be replaced by the VP. Although even that might not work like a lot of problems relating to the trump disaster era its hard to overcome reflexive partisanship
  - jballer 2y ago
    I went to a USDS recruiting event in the Bay Area a decade ago. The whole pitch was that they were Obama’s elite squad of private-sector tech workers, on brief tours of duty, taking orders directly from the White House about what to work on.
    - rat87 2y ago
      They were not Obamas army or his personal servants. Sure some might have been excited to work with President Obama but unlike Trump its not like they were being abused to "go after" perceived political enemies and its not like they would have objected to say Trump telling them to make tech to improve rural access to government resources. They were working to try to improve the government for the good of nation Unlike with "DODGe"which is an attempt to destroy many governmental institutions either to find places to hire loyalists or to remove opposition to corrupt and criminal actions taken by the executive branch or just because someone on one team once said something positive about gay people.
mightyham 2y ago
> This is a wholesale attack on the American safety net, led by billionaires and far-right politicians who are frighteningly comfortable with fascism and autocracy. The last month has been called a coup by politicians, researchers, and watchdogs alike. I find it amusing that many left-wing people are only now getting up in arms about the extent to which our government has been infiltrated by money interests. I understand not wanting to work for Trump's government, but why not just leave it at that? If this person was willing to work for the Biden administration regardless of it's billionaire influences, it betrays that this issue, for them, is a rationalization and not a reason.
- tasty_freeze 2y ago
  Your summary is "both sides" crap. I agree, money has too much influence on both parties. But which party refunded $1T in taxes which were already due and being held aside via accounting tricks (eg, Apple routing all their profits to a tiny subsidiary in Ireland to avoid paying US taxes)? Which party cut the capital gains tax? Which party is going to cut it again? Which party supported Citizens United and which objected? Finally, there is a matter of changing the laws to be in your favor vs flouting the laws and doing what is in your favor. And you find this "amusing."
  - mightyham 2y ago
    Both sides are bad, that much is obvious. If that's all you gleaned from my comment, you completely missed the point being made. I'm also not going to argue with you about which party is more controlled or hurting the country more. That is a terribly uninteresting online discussion to have.
    - tasty_freeze 2y ago
      I reread your comment. All I got out of it was "both sides are bad" and implied that the guy who wrote the article was being hypocritical for quitting due to what Musk is doing but didn't quit during the previous administration. You say I completely missed the point you were making. I guess so. Can you state it directly as I can't unearth it by reading between the lines.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
arunabha 2y ago
Setting aside the politics of the issue(which is very polarizing) this is the part which troubled me the most > "Instead, they found themselves on a call with people who wouldn’t say where they worked in government; in a few cases, some people wouldn’t disclose their last names, or any part of their names" This is terrifying if this is true. Forget this happening in a Government department, if I were in a meeting to discuss the details of my work with people I didn't know and refused to provide basic identification, the standard response would be to call security. Whether you agree or disagree with the goals of DOGE, I think we can all agree that the approach chosen is incorrect. Edit: - Fix formatting
- mattgreenrocks 2y ago
  Yep. And there are established processes to handle reduction in force (RIF) directives and performance issues. None of that was followed. No attempt was even made.
  - xiphias2 2y ago
    Drastic cost cuts are usually not simply performance issues and usually the mistake of top management (usually overhiring), but of course it hurts most the employees.
    - thephyber 2y ago
      This is irrelevant to what DOGE is doing. They aren’t cutting costs; they are (1) enacting the “retribution” that Trump spoke of in the campaign and (2) creating an organization that has fealty to a single person.
- Centigonal 2y ago
  This is a massive insider or outsider threat risk. Anyone with knowledge of this interview process and access to 18F's calendar could schedule one of these meetings and probe the scared employee on the call for sensitive information about the org.
- mindslight 2y ago
throwaway492810 2y ago
18F/TTS repeatedly was cited by the Inspector General for breaking rules and making false statements, often for political reasons. E.g: March 2023: "GSA Misled Customers on Login.gov’s Compliance with Digital Identity Standards" (refused to use mandatory facial recognition because it believed it was racist) [1] June 2017: "Investigation of Whistleblower Reprisal Complaint" (finding that an Obama political appointee retaliated against a career official for blowing the whistle on mismanagement) [2] April 2017: GSA acknowledges "gross mismanagement" [3] October 2016: "Evaluation of 18F" (finding that it spent thousands of dollars on things like "inclusion bots") [4] May 2016: "GSA Data Breach" [5] February 2017: "Evaluation of 18F’s Information Technology Security Compliance" (misrepresented severity of breach) [6] [1] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%20Report-GSA%20Data%20Breach%205.12.16.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%... [2] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/foia/Investigation%20of%20GSA%20Whistleblower%20Reprisal%20Complaint%20June%202017.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/foia/Investigation... [3] https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY17/DI-17-0642/DI-17-0642%20Agency%20Report.pdf https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY17/DI-17-0642/DI-... [4] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F_%20JE17-001_October%2024%202016.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20... [5] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%20Report-GSA%20Data%20Breach%205.12.16.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%... [6] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F%20IT%20Security%20Compliance_JEF17-002_February%2021%202017.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20...
- snvzz 2y ago
  An example of highly relevant, yet flagged with political motivation. We should try and do better than that.
  - otterley 2y ago
    Did you check out the links? They don’t align well with what is claimed (especially the first link). Posts from throwaway accounts should generally be treated with skepticism.
droptablemain 2y ago
The only insight I got from reading this is that the author doesn't like the president or his administration. Big whoop.
- hnburnsy 2y ago
  I was looking forward to hearing about the DOGE interview process and the offer made to those who were let go. The article didn't even say who the interview was with.
jonah 2y ago
For everyone talking about why things are being done like they are, take a look at this article linked to in the post: Understanding DOGE as Procurement Capture https://www.anildash.com/2025/01/04/DOGE-procurement-capture/ https://www.anildash.com/2025/01/04/DOGE-procurement-capture...
karlzt 2y ago
It seems a coincidence that today is February 18.
casey2 2y ago
It's odd that it's mostly Europeans talking about how the US is currently collapsing or something. Not very odd, but odd nonetheless. The general consensus among Americans with a clue is that the Government should serve the people, not the other way around. If a government is "critical" for the people survive then the government has become a Leviathan. Ideally a government should just be another corporation, one buys and sells political services and goods. A failure of a single company shouldn't cause an economic downturn, but that is the situation we find ourselves in. It's not very odd because implicitly Europeans have realized that the government they care most about, in terms of their economic well being, is the American one. (and of course they bragged about not working so much that we had to cut them off lol)
- junto 2y ago
  That’s because Europeans focus on society whilst the US focuses on the individual. That mostly comes from historical experience and “societal maturity”. When society decides that only those people that both actively contribute to society and follow a strict set of guidelines as to how people should be, act and express themselves, then those outside that subset are superfluous to society. Taken to extreme, that subset of superfluous people are just deleted. In Europe, that deletion was abhorrent and it has left an indelible mark that echoes through its gene pool. The US will too have its experience, and eventually learn from it. There’s nothing like watching your disabled or sick child be forcibly removed from your love and care and knowing that they will subsequently be gassed and burnt, simply because your political masters believed they were a burden to their glorious nation.
- regularjack 2y ago
  Please do share your method for identifying who is European here or not.

362 points by mkeeter 2y ago

For anyone (like me) who doesn’t know what 18F is: > 18F is a digital services agency within the Technology Transformation Services department of the General Services Administration (GSA) of the United States Government. 18F helps other government agencies build, buy, and share technology products. The team consists of designers, software engineers, strategists, and product managers who collaborate with other agencies to fix technical problems, build products, and improve public service through technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18F

GeneralMayhem 2y ago
18F - and its sibling the US Digital Service, before it was eviscerated to become the host for the DOGE parasite - is exactly the sort of thing you would create if you want government to run efficiently. Creating room for well-meaning technical experts to offer their expertise across the government, without being locked into a lifelong public-sector career path, is a fantastic idea. Even at its worst, it's taking work that could otherwise go to beltway-bandit contractors, but in-house, with all the cost and friction reduction that that implies. At its best, it's able to spot cross-agency opportunities that no other agency would see on its own. If you're still on the fence about giving the current administration the benefit of the doubt, dismantling these agencies based on zero analysis is perhaps the clearest possible evidence that "efficiency" is not the primary goal, or in fact a goal at all.
- monero-xmr 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - atemerev 2y ago
    I would prefer some medicine without vice signalling with particular gestures from 1930s, thank you.
    - UncleOxidant 2y ago
      This is the first time I've seen the term "vice signalling" and it seems to fit. I suspect this is not the last we'll hear of that term.
  - hoten 2y ago
    If we're done having fun with words, would you like to take this opportunity to provide some reason to think this true? Specifically, how DOGE is combatting inefficiency.
    - fragmede 2y ago
      The question is if one is dumb enough to buy Tweets from the DoGE Twitter account as anything resembling reality. There's plenty of "evidence" there for morons to buy.
      - hoten 2y ago
        Of course, but to start the uphill battle of calling out the bullshit, we have to at least know which bullshit to counter. For me, the only charitable interpretation of DOGE is that they have accidentally figured out how to spread incompetence (not wholly unfamiliar to much of the government) to the small islands that fended it off (gutting 18F/USDS). The cherry was accidentally firing a chunk of the nation's nuclear experts to save a dime, and then clawing them back. I think any claim of DOGE doing good work has to address those things in a convincing manner (in addition to why the existing processes are lacking; GAO). I haven't seen that attempted by anyone.
    - monero-xmr 2y ago
      How would cutting spending be a parasite? The goal is to cut spending.
      - hoten 2y ago
        That does seem to be the goal. But the facade is that it is wasteful spending being cut.
      - MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
        The parasitic act is cutting spending while leveraging the position to increase their own revenue. The guy "cutting spending" is getting contracts and tax cuts out of the deal, and killing watchdog agencies and anything else that might try to stop him. It's almost poetically parasitic. He's inside the host, sucking it dry, while killing anything that can get in his way.
  - MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
    The parasites are trying to raise the national debt by 4 trillion USD, to pass on as tax cuts to only the richest people in the country. DOGE is playing whack-a-mole against figures that are 5 orders of magnitude smaller, while ignoring the waste that pads their own pockets.
    - monero-xmr 2y ago
      The ideal world is zero tax. Failing that the minimal possible tax. Paying taxes is not in itself virtuous, nor is spending tax money a good thing. We cut spending, then we cut taxes
      - btilly 2y ago
        Let's not cut taxes until after the deficit is zeroed out. Preferably until after the debt is going down, so that the next generation doesn't have to pay interest on our poor decisions.
      - MyOutfitIsVague 2y ago
        How do we fund road repairs and constructions with zero tax? Medical care for the poor who can't afford medical care or insurance? Public education in general?
        ethbr1 2y ago
        And critically, are these things more cheaply centrally provided by a government? Not providing a medical safety net or social security net seems like it's saving money... until one has to account for the downstream costs those decisions have.
        monero-xmr 2y ago
        If we decide to do these things with tax dollars, then as a society our goal should be the best outcome for the lowest cost. Many seem to have forgotten this
        2y ago
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - mock-possum 2y ago
    That’s its stated purpose, yes, but given whose mouth those statements have come out of, I’m pretty skeptical that that’s going to be the actual outcome. Totally willing to be proven wrong, we’ll see.
- EnergyAmy 2y ago
  It's astounding that this is crystal clear, and yet you still have people like the sibling commenter trying to find ways of defending Musk. It reminds me of the quote comparing Libertarians to cats: > Libertarians are like house cats in that they are convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand People like that shouldn't be allowed to vote. I don't actually believe that, but it's hard to watch Idiocracy happen in real time and watch low-information people cheer it on.
  - rl3 2y ago
    While a lot of us both relate and agree, I’m not sure the rhetoric is helpful here. If the flame wars are kept to a minimum, the submission keeps trending, and awareness rises. This one in particular is very important for the tech community. I think the crux is that too many people are taking what’s being said at face value. The banner of cost cutting and lean government was chosen because it’s hard to argue with, assuming it’s true and done responsibly - which it isn’t. Randomly firing 200 people that worked at NNSA is one of the most profound examples of this, let alone gutting 18F. For anyone paying attention, it’s indeed crystal clear the move is being used to install loyalists while “saving” an amount of money that’s order(s) of magnitude less than the grift they’ve granted themselves, after cutting the very watchdogs setup to stop that kind of grift. Heck, even the word grift is charitable when it’s more like outright brazen corruption. However, convincing everyone of this difficult insofar that it requires them to a) not take these people at face value, and b) swallow the pill that not only were they wrong for trusting said persons in the first place, but they potentially even voted in the administration that’s doing the damage. Getting people to admit that they were wrong, even to themselves, is pretty hard these days. Hopefully it becomes too obvious to ignore, and that process becomes easier when it’s replaced by a feeling of betrayal. Because if there’s one things American love on either side of the aisle, it’s getting angry. 18F was one of the finest examples of a non-partisan agile tech organization that was highly efficient and effective. It was just trashed it for no good reason at all.
    - foobarian 2y ago
      It's telling that all the cost cutting is happening in the 1% slice of the pie, not the defense slice of the pie. There be dragons most likely.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  Qft. USDS/18F was the correct answer to "Many US government departments have similar needs, but insufficient IT expertise (or authority) to deliver well." To which the obvious solution was to create a center of excellence for those skills, then offer them across the government. Most critically, including paved roads of the "right" way to do things (but which no individual agency was willing to fight to get approved). PS: Fuck DOGE/Elon for having enough hubris so as to think they can do better. Although my guess is Hanlon's razor, with addendum, applies. >> Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. (or ego) To repeat my previous framing of this: it's easy to sell younger technologists on a two step plan to make things better. (1) Destroy the old (2) Build the new. Unfortunately, they don't yet understand the latter is orders of magnitude more difficult than the former.
  - dkhenry 2y ago
    I worked for the USDS in the early days and I am very familiar with 18F, and I don't think your comment tracks. There were lots of issues with agencies using 18F, and not much of the federal IT spend migrated to 18F during its 10 year history, even though most of the products they launched were good. Even USDS teams didn't always take up 18F on its products, and instead would utilize outside contracts for a majority of their projects. Realistically the government needs to do better then 18F was doing and there are many reforms needed to actually have a paved road agencies can drive on.
    - omnivore 2y ago
      The model of 18F changed a lot, none of those products including Login.gov or Cloud.gov were part of 18F, they're all spinfoffs that live within TTS.
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      Appreciate the comment! If you had a magic wand, what are the main problems you would unblock to create better/cheaper/faster government IT outcomes, based on your experience?
      - 2y ago
zerocrates 2y ago
Perhaps more widely known very recently for being the subject of an Elon tweet saying "that group has been deleted," though whether he was referring to 18F as a whole or just those working on the free filing system for the IRS was unclear.
js2 2y ago
18F has been discussed on HN quite a few times, though not too much recently: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=18f https://hn.algolia.com/?q=18f Here's its GitHub org: https://github.com/18F https://github.com/18F
khazhoux 2y ago
Are there any metrics to show 18F or USDS are strong successes? My impression has always been that it is a well-intended but low-impact effort.
- tehjoker 2y ago
  Hard to say who's responsibility it is but federal websites have gotten noticeably less shitty over time and I always feel more at ease on a website that obviously had their input.
- pimlottc 2y ago
  You could always read one of USDS’s reports to Congress to get an idea on what they’ve done: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22report+to+congress%22+%2Bsite%3Ausds.gov https://www.google.com/search?q=%22report+to+congress%22+%2B...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- itronitron 2y ago
  Like when a state considers itself a global superpower but hasn't had any notable impact on an unremarkably sized rock orbiting an average sized star in a barely noticeable galaxy?
  - hofrogs 2y ago
    [dead]
- snowwrestler 2y ago
  One of the big wins was login.gov which is modern, easy to use, more secure, and less expensive than the crazy array of ancient agency-specific login systems it was in the process of replacing. What happens to it now, I have no idea. It’s probably going to be scrapped in favor of “login with X”.

bsimpson 2y ago

That's too long for me to read, so apologies if the answer was too subtle for "Find in page…" > I’m not leaving under a “deferred resignation”. > … > Instead, I resigned from my position as a product designer, submitting two weeks’ notice…well, two weeks ago. If they're offering you a buyout and you don't want to work there, why wouldn't you take it?

steveklabnik 2y ago
The part you cut out explains it: > (Though it’s possible I almost was; more on that later.) The part from later in the post that explains it: > In a terrible coda, a large number of probationary employees were summarily let go at my agency just before my last day. He wasn't offered a buyout. He quit, and then later, a lot of people were let go. He believes it's probable he would have been one of them had he stayed.
- linkregister 2y ago
  Everyone in the federal government received an email from OPM entitled "A Fork in the Road", offering the opportunity to receive a buyout in exchange for their resignation.
  - steveklabnik 2y ago
    I actually forgot that 18F is literally part of the government instead of a contractor. Thank you. (I also thought that probationary employees were not eligible for the buyout, but now that makes me want to go check on the accuracy of that.)
    - ericd 2y ago
      Applied to probationary employees as well. I know of one who was there for two days and took it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

bko 2y ago

[flagged]

gkoberger 2y ago
You somehow picked an example he didn’t even cite. (And for what it’s worth, my recent DMV experiences have been delightfully painless… a large part thanks to 18F)
sophacles 2y ago
What does the dmv have to do with the federal government?
- bko 2y ago
  TSA? Security theatre? > In 2015, TSA agents failed to detect prohibited items in 67 out of 70 tests, resulting in a 95% failure rate Does this change your opinion on the bureaucracy? https://www.vox.com/2016/5/17/11687014/tsa-against-airport-security https://www.vox.com/2016/5/17/11687014/tsa-against-airport-s...
  - EnergyAmy 2y ago
    The TSA needs to be abolished, but that has no bearing on 18F or other government agencies.
  - sophacles 2y ago
    I don't know that I expressed an opinion on the bureaucracy, nor an the TSA, security theatre or anything else. I don't think any of those are related to my question about why the DMV is relevant to Federal policy. (Note - I asked because the DMV is a per-state agency and the discussion is about Federal policies)

j2kun 2y ago

Expecting this article to get flag-killed, as all politically-inclined submissions critical of Elon seem to be these days.

jonas21 2y ago
All politically-inclined submissions supportive of Elon are also quickly flag-killed. Perhaps it's for the best.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  > Perhaps it's for the best. It is not. We bear a lot of the responsibility for creating this situation, we shouldn't be able to just turn away from it now that it ended up where it was always going to.
- anon7000 2y ago
  It's definitely very political. But also very relevant to us, because Elon is applying tech business practices to the federal government. Move fast & break things (great for R&D, awful for organizations that are supposed to be stable), mass-layoffs (and subsequently re-hiring after you figure out what broke), thinking that there's no value in the legacy systems (and not keeping anyone around who might have known that), etc. It's important for us to realize that while tech has been an economic powerhouse, our culture and management practices aren't all good. Esp when it comes to tech CEOs who have been very successful, have a big ego, and think they can do better at anything.
  - someothherguyy 2y ago
    Especially technology CEOs of long term unprofitable companies that were propped up to succeed by government programs favoring research and development. Now that they have a place in the market, it is time to remove those programs for everyone else who may attempt to compete.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  > All politically-inclined submissions supportive of Elon are also quickly flag-killed. Funny, I haven't seen anything remotely commendable about Elon get submitted in months. Doesn't seem like a real issue.

simonw 2y ago

Musk tweet on 18F: "That group has been deleted" - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1886498750052327520 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1886498750052327520 Among other things, it frustrates me that Elon's work here has echoes of "what happens if we bring in experts from the tech world to help make government IT more efficient" while ignoring that that's what 18F did, and it worked really well.

mambodog 2y ago
he doesn’t want experts, he wants people who will be subservient to him. expertise would get in the way of that, because experts would likely understand that he has no idea what he’s talking about, and not respect his dictates. see: everyone who knew how things worked at twitter.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  That seems overly reductive. Opposition is more effective when we strongman our opponents rather than strawman them. It's possible (probable?) Elon actually things "his" people are more talented.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    It is possible, but not probable. The M.O. of the entire administration has been to replace expertise with loyalty. No reason to believe this group is any different. This was also the case in 2017.
  - roguecoder 2y ago
    If so, he is utterly unqualified to participate in hiring or firing.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
    It's not like this is new behavior from him. He wants people who agree with him and will do what he asks. He doesn't want pushback, and he definitely doesn't want to be told he's wrong. https://www.yahoo.com/news/data-scientist-resigned-twitter-blasted-181505572.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/data-scientist-resigned-twitter-b...

neilv 2y ago

Question for lawyers. I can understand and respect someone leaving on principle, or someone simply unable to tolerate an immediate situation. But if a government employee is feeling under occupation by a destructive invader, and possibly expecting to be terminated, do they keep significant legal options open by waiting it out, rather than resigning, if they can tolerate to do so? For example, let's say that significant elements of legislative or judicial branches decide not to play along with the current maneuvers, and take corrective action. Or let's say that employees are able to sue for reinstatement, with damages? Or to sue rogue individuals personally, in some way that pierces whatever immunity the rogues might think they enjoy. Does the wronged person have a better case if they don't resign?

UncleOxidant 2y ago
Not a lawyer, but I wonder about this as well though more from the standpoint of trying to stay in there to be a witness to the destruction and to try to do what you can to slow it down. Though in this case, as he was still probationary he wouldn't have had that option. They (DOGE) found out that it's hard to fire federal government employees, but they found the loophole with probationary employees.
layer8 2y ago
Not a lawyer, but by resigning voluntarily, you basically relinquish all options regarding keeping the job that you would otherwise have had. You can’t later invoke that you didn’t really mean to resign. It’s also often more advantageous to wait to be let go in order to collect severance pay. (Though likely not for the OP due to his probationary status, and there is also a big question mark regarding pay for the current government layoffs.)
ajross 2y ago
All your questions presuppose an executive branch that is bound by the decisions of the judicial branch. This one isn't, or certainly doesn't feel that it is. So the answer is practical, not legal. The control they can exert is the control they can get away with exerting without undue cost. That might involve accepting the results of law suits from disgruntled employees, or it might not. Certainly right now they seem disinclined.

siliconc0w 2y ago

Mandatory service for the government would go a long way to educating the public just want these organizations do and building empathy for the problems they face. There is a significant risk of civil unrest as the competent employees are pushed out and government ceases to be able to function while private companies take advantage of lack of regulation to try and further extract value from captured markets.

xg15 2y ago
I think exactly this has been the deliberate strategy of a part of the US' political class for a long time - "starve the beast" and all. This seems like the final culmination of those plans.
- jjuel 2y ago
  Tell the people the government is inefficient and cannot work as intended. Defund said government so it doesn't work as intended. Privatize the work and profit. A playbook as old as time. Except they are doing it bigger and more brazenly than ever.
DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
> Mandatory service for [...] building empathy I understand your thought-process here, but I'll say it really doesn't work out like that in-practice. E.g. mandatory schooling certainly didn't make me build-up empathy for teachers and institutions, it had quite the opposite effect in my case.
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  I wonder how one can experience public schooling (20 years ago or now) and not have sympathy for the struggles of teachers.
  - DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
    Oh, in retrospect/hindsight, absolutely. But in-person, when you’re on the spectrum, in the 1990s, when the senior staff put their stock in discipline - not understanding - does not build empathy on either side.

1shooner 2y ago

For those not familiar with the author, Ethan Marcotte literally wrote the book on responsive web design (and coined the phrase). I point that out about because I think it is (or was) relevant that someone with such a place in digital design history had chosen public service.

reagan83 2y ago
He didn’t pick “public service” because when an administration didn’t match his political preferences he bashed that admin in this post. That’s not a public servant but a partisan servant.
micromacrofoot 2y ago
There are very few people that would be better suited for a role like this than Ethan, any major web company would be fortunate to have him on staff... and the fact that he chose to work at 18F speaks volumes about the work they were doing there.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

eob 2y ago

There was an SF office of 18F -- IIRC it was in the building to the right of the Civic Center park as you looked at it from the Bart stop. They were great folks from every encounter I had with them.

Temporary_31337 2y ago

I think this one is hard to defend but let me tell you a similar story in the UK. Gov uk was redesigned by some of the smartest people and generally I still praise a lot of digital transformation from that era. But after a while people got complacent and not much is happening or improving recently. So in that sense stirring the hive might be a good thing- even if 18F delivered good things in the past. Unfortunately with doge and Musk I don’t really see how something better comes out of the chaos- destroying things just for the sake of it is not good enough plan and basically is missing the second part- what happens after the revolution.

exogeny 2y ago

[flagged]

9283409232 2y ago

I still don't understand what getting rid of 18F accomplished. Someone on HN said they were "openly partisan"[0] but neglected to explain how. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43059187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43059187

ajross 2y ago
18F was staffed by a bunch of young tech folks who lean left. That makes them enemies subject to persecution. I really don't think there's any more complexity than that. Expect this kind of thing to be the norm in the future.
- omnivore 2y ago
  Not young people at all, actually. Mostly mid-to-senior people.
micromacrofoot 2y ago
Unfortunately things like accessibility (which 18F provides guidance on) has been rolled into 'DEI' by the current administration, and is therefore a partisan issue. 18F was also designed for remote work, which oddly has become another partisan issue.
roguecoder 2y ago
Anything that prevents government contractors from extracting maximal taxpayer dollars for their shareholders is in opposition to current partisan goals. As a result, simply being nerds committed to principles like "software should work" or "government information should be accessible, as required by law" is now considered "openly partisan": https://technical.ly/civic-news/18f-profile/ https://technical.ly/civic-news/18f-profile/
hooverd 2y ago
They promoted things like "accessibility", which is woke of course.
hnburnsy 2y ago
According to a GSA forensic audit, 18F was losing money, had billing issues, and spent too much time on non-billable activities (52% versus 48% billable). One of the partisan activities referred to was a pronoun replacing slack bot referenced in this GSA report... https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F_%20JE17-001_October%2024%202016.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20... The GSA conclusion was... 1. Establish a viable plan to ensure full cost recovery of ASF funds expended by 18F. 2. Ensure that internal 18F projects have appropriate supervisory review. 3. Implement controls over 18F’s reimbursable agreement process to ensure that work is not performed outside of a fully executed agreement. 4. Ensure that GSA CIO reviews and approves, in writing, all 18F IT-related work performed for GSA internal organizations. 5. Implement a comprehensive review of 18F’s past work to ensure accuracy of all billings. 6. Establish reliable internal controls to ensure that 18F’s future billings are accurate. 7. Ensure that 18F’s billing records are retained in accordance with GSA records management standards.

w10-1 2y ago

Paraphrasing lines not to cross: 1. Working remotely 2. Killing or surveilling people 3. Discussing work with someone outside work The resignation stemmed from the possibility of 3. By contrast, some people stay in their positions or businesses notwithstanding adjudications of fraud, abuse, treachery, etc. Of those two kinds of people, which will most successfully infiltrate and control an organization? (As a hint, Stalin was not a leader but a bureaucrat who managed to oust all the actual leaders, and did Putin with the oligarchs.) I respect the author's choice as the best alternative, and respect his speaking up for the organization. I just wish we could give him a better alternative.

corpMaverick 2y ago

May be an opportunity to find talent for State or City governments that want to create their own digital services agencies?

omnivore 2y ago
there are lots of them already, but many more that need them.

jballer 2y ago

To recap: OP resigned because he feared what might happen in a meeting with USDS. It might have required him to kill someone, or explain his work to a contractor. Somehow these are presented as equally-odious propositions. He openly refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of USDS, referring to it as "a so-called 'department'", and neglects even a cursory investigation into whether it may in fact be a legitimate executive agency established by Obama, staffed by government employees with requisite clearances and authority. It's wild to me that so many smart people think the White House should be boxed out of the day-to-day operations of GSA and OMB, whether by law or tradition, despite being undeniably responsible for their actions.

rat87 2y ago
Yes people don't want Trump corrupting the government. Corruption is bad. Power is easy to abuse. Checks are hard when a president doesn't care about the law or the constituon kr the damage he does to the country. There's a reason several departments are supposed to be at arms length from the president. Many of these reforms happened after Nixon. Now assuming the country survives it's clear we need something more. Possibly some administrative agencies need to be placed under the judicial branch to avoid executive corruption. Also impeachment needs to be much easier, arguably we need something like a vote of no confidence where a malcious president can be replaced by the VP. Although even that might not work like a lot of problems relating to the trump disaster era its hard to overcome reflexive partisanship
- jballer 2y ago
  I went to a USDS recruiting event in the Bay Area a decade ago. The whole pitch was that they were Obama’s elite squad of private-sector tech workers, on brief tours of duty, taking orders directly from the White House about what to work on.
  - rat87 2y ago
    They were not Obamas army or his personal servants. Sure some might have been excited to work with President Obama but unlike Trump its not like they were being abused to "go after" perceived political enemies and its not like they would have objected to say Trump telling them to make tech to improve rural access to government resources. They were working to try to improve the government for the good of nation Unlike with "DODGe"which is an attempt to destroy many governmental institutions either to find places to hire loyalists or to remove opposition to corrupt and criminal actions taken by the executive branch or just because someone on one team once said something positive about gay people.

mightyham 2y ago

> This is a wholesale attack on the American safety net, led by billionaires and far-right politicians who are frighteningly comfortable with fascism and autocracy. The last month has been called a coup by politicians, researchers, and watchdogs alike. I find it amusing that many left-wing people are only now getting up in arms about the extent to which our government has been infiltrated by money interests. I understand not wanting to work for Trump's government, but why not just leave it at that? If this person was willing to work for the Biden administration regardless of it's billionaire influences, it betrays that this issue, for them, is a rationalization and not a reason.

tasty_freeze 2y ago
Your summary is "both sides" crap. I agree, money has too much influence on both parties. But which party refunded $1T in taxes which were already due and being held aside via accounting tricks (eg, Apple routing all their profits to a tiny subsidiary in Ireland to avoid paying US taxes)? Which party cut the capital gains tax? Which party is going to cut it again? Which party supported Citizens United and which objected? Finally, there is a matter of changing the laws to be in your favor vs flouting the laws and doing what is in your favor. And you find this "amusing."
- mightyham 2y ago
  Both sides are bad, that much is obvious. If that's all you gleaned from my comment, you completely missed the point being made. I'm also not going to argue with you about which party is more controlled or hurting the country more. That is a terribly uninteresting online discussion to have.
  - tasty_freeze 2y ago
    I reread your comment. All I got out of it was "both sides are bad" and implied that the guy who wrote the article was being hypocritical for quitting due to what Musk is doing but didn't quit during the previous administration. You say I completely missed the point you were making. I guess so. Can you state it directly as I can't unearth it by reading between the lines.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

arunabha 2y ago

Setting aside the politics of the issue(which is very polarizing) this is the part which troubled me the most > "Instead, they found themselves on a call with people who wouldn’t say where they worked in government; in a few cases, some people wouldn’t disclose their last names, or any part of their names" This is terrifying if this is true. Forget this happening in a Government department, if I were in a meeting to discuss the details of my work with people I didn't know and refused to provide basic identification, the standard response would be to call security. Whether you agree or disagree with the goals of DOGE, I think we can all agree that the approach chosen is incorrect. Edit: - Fix formatting

mattgreenrocks 2y ago
Yep. And there are established processes to handle reduction in force (RIF) directives and performance issues. None of that was followed. No attempt was even made.
- xiphias2 2y ago
  Drastic cost cuts are usually not simply performance issues and usually the mistake of top management (usually overhiring), but of course it hurts most the employees.
  - thephyber 2y ago
    This is irrelevant to what DOGE is doing. They aren’t cutting costs; they are (1) enacting the “retribution” that Trump spoke of in the campaign and (2) creating an organization that has fealty to a single person.
Centigonal 2y ago
This is a massive insider or outsider threat risk. Anyone with knowledge of this interview process and access to 18F's calendar could schedule one of these meetings and probe the scared employee on the call for sensitive information about the org.
mindslight 2y ago

throwaway492810 2y ago

18F/TTS repeatedly was cited by the Inspector General for breaking rules and making false statements, often for political reasons. E.g: March 2023: "GSA Misled Customers on Login.gov’s Compliance with Digital Identity Standards" (refused to use mandatory facial recognition because it believed it was racist) [1] June 2017: "Investigation of Whistleblower Reprisal Complaint" (finding that an Obama political appointee retaliated against a career official for blowing the whistle on mismanagement) [2] April 2017: GSA acknowledges "gross mismanagement" [3] October 2016: "Evaluation of 18F" (finding that it spent thousands of dollars on things like "inclusion bots") [4] May 2016: "GSA Data Breach" [5] February 2017: "Evaluation of 18F’s Information Technology Security Compliance" (misrepresented severity of breach) [6] [1] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%20Report-GSA%20Data%20Breach%205.12.16.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%... [2] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/foia/Investigation%20of%20GSA%20Whistleblower%20Reprisal%20Complaint%20June%202017.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/foia/Investigation... [3] https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY17/DI-17-0642/DI-17-0642%20Agency%20Report.pdf https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY17/DI-17-0642/DI-... [4] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F_%20JE17-001_October%2024%202016.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20... [5] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%20Report-GSA%20Data%20Breach%205.12.16.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/Alert%... [6] https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20EVALUATION%20REPORT_Evaluation%20of%2018F%20IT%20Security%20Compliance_JEF17-002_February%2021%202017.pdf https://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/files/ipa-reports/OIG%20...

snvzz 2y ago
An example of highly relevant, yet flagged with political motivation. We should try and do better than that.
- otterley 2y ago
  Did you check out the links? They don’t align well with what is claimed (especially the first link). Posts from throwaway accounts should generally be treated with skepticism.

droptablemain 2y ago

The only insight I got from reading this is that the author doesn't like the president or his administration. Big whoop.

hnburnsy 2y ago
I was looking forward to hearing about the DOGE interview process and the offer made to those who were let go. The article didn't even say who the interview was with.

jonah 2y ago

For everyone talking about why things are being done like they are, take a look at this article linked to in the post: Understanding DOGE as Procurement Capture https://www.anildash.com/2025/01/04/DOGE-procurement-capture/ https://www.anildash.com/2025/01/04/DOGE-procurement-capture...

karlzt 2y ago

It seems a coincidence that today is February 18.

casey2 2y ago

It's odd that it's mostly Europeans talking about how the US is currently collapsing or something. Not very odd, but odd nonetheless. The general consensus among Americans with a clue is that the Government should serve the people, not the other way around. If a government is "critical" for the people survive then the government has become a Leviathan. Ideally a government should just be another corporation, one buys and sells political services and goods. A failure of a single company shouldn't cause an economic downturn, but that is the situation we find ourselves in. It's not very odd because implicitly Europeans have realized that the government they care most about, in terms of their economic well being, is the American one. (and of course they bragged about not working so much that we had to cut them off lol)

junto 2y ago
That’s because Europeans focus on society whilst the US focuses on the individual. That mostly comes from historical experience and “societal maturity”. When society decides that only those people that both actively contribute to society and follow a strict set of guidelines as to how people should be, act and express themselves, then those outside that subset are superfluous to society. Taken to extreme, that subset of superfluous people are just deleted. In Europe, that deletion was abhorrent and it has left an indelible mark that echoes through its gene pool. The US will too have its experience, and eventually learn from it. There’s nothing like watching your disabled or sick child be forcibly removed from your love and care and knowing that they will subsequently be gassed and burnt, simply because your political masters believed they were a burden to their glorious nation.
regularjack 2y ago
Please do share your method for identifying who is European here or not.