38 ms·

DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

• cgcrob 2y ago
  Having access to the data scares me less than the utter ineptitude demonstrated in presenting “findings”. Findings in quotes because if I used that level of analytical rigour I’d be instantly fired, probably out of a cannon into the sun.
  • MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
    It's as if that's not what it's about at all.
• ksynwa 2y ago
  What's Elon's beef with USAID? I would think he would go after something like food stamps first owing to his libertarian ethos. Maybe he sees USAID as a completely benevolent handout and a waste of money? I cannot begin to understand why.
  • hnhg 2y ago
    Perhaps he wants the budget reallocated to something he has more financial interest in and control over? Or something like that for Thiel or others?
  • Terr_ 2y ago
    They'll work their way up to anti-constitutional attacks on everything else if they get a chance, USAID is their starting point because it's a softer target in a few ways: 1. The people who'll suffer or die from their mal-management will generally be faraway foreigners, as opposed to people voters know. 2. More of the victims have a much more difficult time launching any kind of lawsuit in US courts. 3. It has a small veneer of Presidential-involvement-ness due to its proximity to diplomacy and foreign relations. 4. Like tariffs, being able to withhold aid allows Trump to commit extortion against other countries, much like how he was impeached for extorting Ukraine in his first term.
    • techorange 2y ago
      Ironically USAID might help Americans more than foreign folks, and disproportionately Trump’s own supporters - if the money is being spent to buy American products, particularly food, that is then shipped overseas.
  • cgcrob 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • sen 2y ago
    > U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID): The USAID Inspector General initiated a probe into Starlink satellite terminals provided to the Government of Ukraine From a House Committee report matching Elon’s actions to agencies he has personal issues with: https://democrats-judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfiles/2025.02.13_fact_sheet_re_musk_investigations.pdf https://democrats-judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfiles/2025.02....
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  • danparsonson 2y ago
    An easy win with his rabid xenophobic fan base? A soft target to hurt his opponents and distract from other terrible things they're doing?
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • unsnap_biceps 2y ago
    USAID was funding the StarLink deployment in Ukraine and was reexamining the deal[1], likely to try to negotiate a cheaper plan or to reduce the funding. My opinion is that it likely hit his ego a bit and it was a really sweet deal for StarLink, so losing out on it would suck. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/usaid-elon-musk-starlink-probe-ukraine-2027054 https://www.newsweek.com/usaid-elon-musk-starlink-probe-ukra...
    • scarab92 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • obl1que 2y ago
        Musk is petty, though. Remember "pedo guy?" Given that, your retort inadvertently supports the GP.
      • maxden 2y ago
        It may not be the monetary amount but the message it sends. Mess with me and Ill shut you down.
        • scarab92 2y ago
          Unlikely. No one really cares about temporary low-value ad-hoc arrangements like the one between Starlink and USAID. It's too small to matter. The FAA and EPA have been much much bigger headaches for Musk. USAID was just a juicy target, since it was essentially a slush fund.
      • Martinussen 2y ago
        Calling a guy a pedophile repeatedly because you made yourself look stupid getting excited about your cool submarine and how awesome everyone will think you are when you save some kids wasn't really worth much money either. I don't think Musk has the self-control to think like that, honestly.
      • matwood 2y ago
        It had little to do with the contract size. Starlink was being investigated to determine how the Russians were getting/using them. https://www.newsweek.com/usaid-elon-musk-starlink-probe-ukraine-2027054 https://www.newsweek.com/usaid-elon-musk-starlink-probe-ukra... This raises a potential conflict of interest, as Musk's company was under investigation by USAID shortly before he began calling for the shutdown. Starlink's activity in Eastern Europe has been criticized, with many Russian operatives claiming to have access to Starlink despite Musk's assurances that only Ukraine was using the service. Additionally, in September last year, Ukrainian forces downed a Russian drone that had a Starlink terminal integrated with its systems, raising questions as to how secure Starlink's operations during the Ukraine war are.
  • matteotom 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • Marazan 2y ago
    USAID is a bogeyman agency in far-right conspiracy circles. Musk gets his world view from far-right conspiracists.
    • DanielHB 2y ago
      Funny thing is that kind of government foreign aid is the kind of soft-power over smaller countries thing that right-wingers politicians love, or at least used to. Similar to the BS that China pulls with the belt and road initiative (but probably not as bad in most instances). Basically give/loan money, get international political support back. Use political support to bully international institutions (UN, WTO, WHO, etc) to do what you want. I guess soft-power is not enough anymore, they want all the power.
      • ZeroGravitas 2y ago
        Marco Rubio has been very vocal on his support for USAID for years if you want to see what the traditional right wing take on this has been. "Critical to our security" etc. And he is of course in charge of the smoking remains of it now.
        • troupo 2y ago
          The "traditional right wing" has been vocal about many things over the years. Nearly every single one has bent their knee.
          • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
            Conservatism is pretty much dead in the US. It's all about cults of personality and grievance now. Oh, and of course, graft.
            • soraminazuki 2y ago
              Conservatism before Trump was George W Bush, and while they're very different, it definitely wasn't all sunshine and roses. I don't remember a time in my lifetime when conservatism represented anything good.
  • rl3 2y ago
    >What's Elon's beef with USAID? They were investigating Starlink: https://oig.usaid.gov/node/6814 https://oig.usaid.gov/node/6814
    • ConfusedDog 2y ago
      By the look of it, they were investigating how Ukraine use of Starlink provided to them. You make a great journalist. lol.
      • rl3 2y ago
        Thanks. Admittedly "Probably something to do with Starlink" would've been more accurate. https://web.archive.org/web/20250101100055/https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/apr-05-2022-usaid-safeguards-internet-access-ukraine-through-public-private-partnership-spacex https://web.archive.org/web/20250101100055/https://www.usaid... That's now removed from the live website. Point being, it's a little strange USAID was immediately targeted for destruction with extreme prejudice by the same man providing the terminals. Especially given their contentious history: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264
        • ConfusedDog 2y ago
          I'm not refuting Musk probably hate them like all other regulators or might take advantage of getting into like FAA's operation. It's been obvious on both sides of the aisle. Is USAID corrupt? I think so, foreign money is the most difficult to track. Is FAA technology and management sucks? I believe that, too. Many things can be true at the same time. Since no body can fix it before Musk got his butt in started farting, why are people not benefiting from the kickbacks or inefficiencies complaining is beyond me.
          • rl3 2y ago
            >Is USAID corrupt? I think so, ... Yeah wow, so corrupt. /s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_International_Development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_Inter... https://abcnews.go.com/US/former-usaid-official-calls-closure-extinction-level-event/story?id=118422085 https://abcnews.go.com/US/former-usaid-official-calls-closur... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2q13113wwo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2q13113wwo
  • throwawaymaths 2y ago
    what's with people not having beef with USAID? It's done so many crazy and bad things, for example: USAID funded the hepatitis vaccination drive that the CIA used as a cover for espionage against the bin laden family, leading to polio outbreak in pakistan. https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/he-led-cia-bin-laden-and-unwittingly-fueled-vaccine-backlash https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/he-led-cia-bin-laden-and-... Distaste for USAID in any other time would be bipartisan; the Clinton Administration floated shuttering it too. If you go to DC a lot of insiders will say, 'yeah, USAID's got to go'.
    • rhcom2 2y ago
      This seems like a criticism of the CIA, not USAID, no? > The decision to enlist Afridi was probably made by the CIA station chief in Islamabad and was passed on to the Counterterrorism Center back in Langley.
      • throwawaymaths 2y ago
        don't fool yourself. USAID had the power to stop this.
        • gambiting 2y ago
          What makes you think so, exactly? It's not like CIA would let everyone within the organisation know they are doing it. Do you think USAID could just say no to CIA?
          • throwawaymaths 2y ago
            IF YOU ARE INVOLVED WITH LYING TO PEOPLE AND NOT ADMINISTERING VACCINES AND DOING DNA TESTS, THEN IT IS YOUR INDVIDUAL DUTY TO STOP YOUR ORG FROM CONTINUING.
            • gambiting 2y ago
              ....what happened with your capslock? Again, do you think the head of USAID could have just told the head of CIA "no we're not doing this"? What makes you think they were informed at all? That's kind of the entire MO of CIA - they don't inform other agencies what they are doing when it concerns national security, they just go and do it.
  • mbrumlow 2y ago
    My understanding is USAID was one of those organizations thet refused to pause spending when Trump lawfully asked all agencies to stop spending (it was a 90 day hold, not a outright denial, only congress can do that). Agencies that should adhere to trumps orders went to the top.
    • troupo 2y ago
      > refused to pause spending when Trump lawfully asked all agencies to stop spending How do you imagine any agency to "stop spending"? Are salaries not to be paid? Are contracts not to be fulfilled? Are rents not to be paid?
  • jpcom 2y ago
    Scenario: You give someone $40B to feed people, and $1B actually feeds them while $39B vanishes into overhead and ideological reprogramming. Then they tell you they need more. If this is success, what does failure look like?
    • troupo 2y ago
      And you have the proof for these numbers, or are they pulled out of Elon's behind?
      • Ray20 2y ago
        I have my own experience. As a non-American, I know a lot of hungry people. And I have never heard of any help for them from USAID. And who do you think received help from USAID out of all those I have encountered and ever heard about? Only left-leaning democrat's shield "independent" journalists, whose job mostly consist of ideological reprogramming and who now scream all over twitter how Trump destroys their lives. ONLY. So yes, I don't have any numbers, but I'm used to trusting my own eyes. And what I see (on this particular issue) is way more consistent with what Musk says than with what his opponents say.
        • troupo 2y ago
          > And I have never heard of any help for them from USAID Personal anecdotes are never a good proof of anything. > So yes, I don't have any numbers, but I'm used to trusting my own eyes. So you don't believe in viruses bacteria to name just a few things you can't see with your own eyes? USAID had many programs, only a number which where about helping the poor, and it's possible those didn't specifically target your country. E.g. between the poor and hungry people in Moldova (my own native country) and in Sudan USAID would probably chose those in Sudan (what with war and genocide and...). And they might chose to support businesses in Moldova instead (and they did). I'm not saying it's a perfect program devoid of any corruption. What I'm saying I can come up with as many bogus numbers, and with as many personal anecdotes as the next guy. And Elon sure as hell resists any attempts to shed light on his activities and claims. > Only left-leaning democrat's shield "independent" journalists, whose job mostly consist of ideological reprogramming and who now scream all over twitter how Trump destroys their lives. ONLY. Do you think they do that because they lost funding, or because, say, China or Russia stepped into the void with literally the same support programs?
  • jonp888 2y ago
    Eliminating foreign aid seems to be a common cause of neo-conservative movements. Boris Johnson shut down the British equivalent(Department for International Development) and scrapped the commitment to spend 0.7% of GDP on aid. It's simplistic, drastic and brings no specific domestic effect which could be a rallying point for unrest. It's also very easy to come up with rage bait stories of corruption and waste as justification, because in any organisation spending billions of dollars around the world you will always be to find something ridiculous that got funding, even though the proportion of the budget it represents is insignificant.
    • astroid 2y ago
      Lol you clearly have no idea what a 'neo-conservative' is or their history. Neo-Conservatives were a branch of Democrat wark-hawks who wanted to police the world, that were upset about the pacifist attitude of the Democrats at the time - they emerged in the 60's and managed to largely take control of the Republican party moving forward, peaking under George W Bush. Their founding principal was "Peace Through Strength" and have a strong belief in worldwide interventionism. If you think the 'MAGA' / 'Trump' party is neo-conservative you literally just are ignoring the entire history, the power struggle (which Trump won) to retake the party from the Neo-Cons, and the fact that the trump admin is largely isolationist and opposed to being the world police. Don't get me wrong there are still some neo-cons in office and with roles in his admin, but the republican infighting can be summarized as neocon vs MAGA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism https://www.britannica.com/topic/neoconservatism https://www.britannica.com/topic/neoconservatism Words mean things. The MAGE/America First party is focused on non-interventionism, advocate against regime change abroad, with a focus on America and it's interest rather than the endless wars. You can debate the success or merit of that approach I guess, but the Neo-Cons are very happy to provide foreign aid as it is core to their ideology. They tend to do it via NED while the left uses USAID more (although both use both, but they each have lean in one direction). Just for fun, I just tried this little experiment you can try to: " CoPilot: Can you rationally describe Trump as a neocon? CoPilot: No, it would not be accurate to rationally state that Donald Trump is a neoconservative (neocon). Here are some key differences: Foreign Policy: Neocons: Advocate for interventionist foreign policies, promoting democracy and regime change abroad. Trump: Emphasizes “America First” policies, focusing on non-interventionism, reducing military engagements abroad, and prioritizing domestic issues. Military Engagement: Neocons: Support maintaining strong international alliances and a significant military presence globally. Trump: Criticized NATO, praised authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin, and negotiated troop withdrawals from conflict zones like Afghanistan. Economic Policies: Neocons: Generally support free trade and globalization. Trump: Advocates for economic nationalism, including tariffs and renegotiating trade deals to favor American interests. These differences highlight that Trump’s policies and ideology do not align with neoconservative principles. If you have any more questions or need further details, feel free to ask! "
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • lucasRW 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • wat10000 2y ago
      Is that something they did, or is it something you imagine they did because you’re too credulous of right-wing propaganda?
  • rsynnott 2y ago
    ‘Libertarian ethos’. The guy who’s hoovering up personal data on behalf of a guy who just claimed to be king, that one? Like, how are we defining ‘libertarian’ here?
    • ksynwa 2y ago
      I didn't mean it too seriously. Just with regard to how one point in the ideology is about governments being small and how DOGE is at least in rhetoric trying to fire federal employees en masse.
    • tokai 2y ago
      libertarian / ˌlɪbəˈtɛərɪən / noun 1) an idiot
  • intended 2y ago
    Collateral damage.
  • jeffbee 2y ago
    He actually wants black Africans to die from AIDS.
  • Workaccount2 2y ago
    It's more likely it came from Trump instead of Elon. Trump is an isolationist and has long complained about money being spent abroad rather than at home.
  • mindslight 2y ago
    The only thing "libertarian" about Musk is his extreme interest in his own freedom - everyone else's be damned.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    Less than 10% went to the needy. Most of the rest was either wasteful, political or a chain of NGOs performing kickbacks. They were funding censorship campaigns on American citizens etc
• aredox 2y ago
  If they have the ability to change data, then absolutely none of their claims can be trusted. Neither Musk nor his A-team of hackers have demonstrated any integrity through their career - contrary to HN guidelines, the default position is to assume the worst from them. Think about it once they begin putting the opposition on show trials.
  • ElonChrist 2y ago
    [dead]
  • tonyhart7 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • ZeroGravitas 2y ago
      Your comment is vague so it's not clear if you are accusing voters in general of uncrtitically accepting obvious propaganda or if you yourself have believed obvious propaganda generated by DOGE.
    • cgcrob 2y ago
      The distinction between whether or not someone is formally registered as dead and whether or if they receive money are two completely different things and should not be confused. If you conflate the two issues then you can only be being disingenuous. I've worked at a company which had people who have been dead longer than America exists in their database and some of them do not have a recorded date of death. That does not mean they are not dead, just that the death was not confirmed. And no they weren't being paid. However if you get some junior developer in with no real knowledge of what they are doing on the job, stuff like this will appear and you can use it for political collateral because no one cares enough to understand the problem and ask questions. Like yourself.
    • Mekoloto 2y ago
      No 300 year old pensionier got a paycheck. There was an audit just a few years back which didn't find big/relevant issues. The USA Gov is not completly brain dead. And no 'people didn't vote for this'. 1. only about 60-70% of people voted and from them around 50% voted for Trump. The question is still valid if this should allow the current gov to overhaul the whole system that agressivly. A gov and the people depending on it, are not tech bros who can afford to get fired. Musk/Trump is already responsible for real death alone through the way they cut USAID: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/us-aid-freeze-claims-first-victims-as-oxygen-supplies-cut/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people... There is a 'okayisch' way to stop everything (its the USA choice if the most powerful and richest country is no longer able or motivated to help around the globe despite the damage a country like the USA does around the globe, think co2, resources etc.) and there is the Musk/Trump way and no this is not okay at all. Its a breach of social contract, respect etc.
• domoregood 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • Clubber 2y ago
    Ok, that's pretty damn funny. Thanks for bringing light in a sea of whatever the hell this thread is.
• drowsspa 2y ago
  I find it wild that apparently there is no law onto which government workers can cling to refuse these requests. Is it all just based on conventions, goodwill and culture?
  • kupopuffs 2y ago
    who even knows the law in the moment? the seal of the president is p convincing. heck just look at all the social engineering/phishing that works
    • afandian 2y ago
      Do civil servants have trade unions in the US? This seems like a place they could step up to offer advice.
      • lazyasciiart 2y ago
        Yes, and they have sued over several events so far. I don’t know what advice they could give in the moment.
        • afandian 2y ago
          If I were in their shoes I would take some small comfort from a constitutional lawyer even saying "officially we don't know". It's not often you're asked to do something that could break the law, with the whistle-blowing chain being potentially broken at the top.
  • jpcom 2y ago
    Why do you want them to refuse audit requests? There is no upside to hiding egregious government waste other than paying politicians via kickbacks more than what is legally mandated.
    • InDubioProRubio 2y ago
      Waste is all things i do not understand? And i dont understand all things, because i fired the experts. Thus all is waste. Its running a state, how hard can it be- my cousin was major of a town once.
• neonate 2y ago
  https://web.archive.org/web/20250220063358/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/02/doge-god-mode-access/681719/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250220063358/https://www.theat... https://archive.ph/Oa42l https://archive.ph/Oa42l
• Swoerd 2y ago
  [dead]
• stuaxo 2y ago
  They will have had to impose this too. The systems were built as separate systems to avoid (in a systems designers most fevered nightmares) a scenario like this.
  • scarab92 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • noja 2y ago
      The organisations were designed to be separate, and the systems design follows that.
      • scarab92 2y ago
        Not really, agencies are merged and split and have their remit changed all the time. If there were a way to efficiently manage 2.5 million staff in a single department, then we'd likely do that, but it's more efficient to specialise, so we do that instead. Firewalling data between departments is rarely a design consideration, except in obvious cases (military), and it hardly matters in this scenario anyway, because it's not like Musk is walking into all 400 agencies with a laptop. DOGE is hiring an army of advisors and dividing them up between agencies.
        • intended 2y ago
          I believe Americans would be terrified of the idea of government agencies linking all their information together. Letting them be siloed is quite likely intentional. You seem to be making the analysis based on first principles, but it looks like it’s inspired by some facts or experience you have. could you share that source /info?
        • l33tman 2y ago
          I don't know about the US but in other countries it is definitely by design that the departments and their data are separate. It is far too easy to abuse gathering and joining data on people otherwise. History did teach us these lessons, and it's continuously visible as well today, fortunately at small scales just because they are separate. It would truly be a nightmare scenario to have all government databases under a single potentially corrupt roof or having someone with access to all of them cough.
• tabakd 2y ago
  Is there any reason this data shouldn't be public for everyone to read?
  • jpcom 2y ago
    define "everyone" -- elected officials who are supposed to have oversight and insight into where our tax dollars are going? It's not like they're providing replicas over bittorrent.
    • procaryote 2y ago
      Give it time. Centralised access managed by junior engineers pretty much guarantees the data gets stolen. Perhaps the first foreign adversary nation state getting there will patch the security flaws after stealing the data?
      • Amezarak 2y ago
        A Chinese APT had unfettered access to the Treasury Department, discovered back in December. It's interesting that people are much more excited about new government employees accessing these systems as part of their duties than they are about this.
        • xnx 2y ago
          True, but the Chinese also can't order malicious tax audits against political opponents like Trump can.
          • Amezarak 2y ago
            Are you arguing that people are at risk because a comparison of Treasury and IRS records is going to reveal tax fraud or something? I don’t think that’s on the table. At any rate, Trump doesn’t need DOGE to do that, he can just order the IRS to do it like FDR did if that’s what he’s going to do.
        • 2y ago
• jpcom 2y ago
  If you want accountability someone needs to have root access. If you don't want accountability, you are a politician getting kickbacks through obfuscation.
  • scarab92 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • kzrdude 2y ago
      That's an empty argument. I think people hate musk, if they do, for the things he does and has done. It's not the other way around. Judging people for their actions is a fair way to look at it.
      • bluescrn 2y ago
        > I think people hate musk, if they do, for the things he does and has done. No, they hate Musk for the things he says and has said (And things he allows other people to say on his platform). Some people treat actions more seriously than words. Others choose to treat words more seriously than actions.
        • bloopernova 2y ago
          Some people have read history, and know that words turn into actions over time. Especially those that feed (and feed on) fear and hatred.
          • bluescrn 2y ago
            Yes, it happens. Somebody just shot up a Tesla dealership (that had recently also suffered an arson attempt), probably radicalised by online rhetoric. But on the other hand, regimes that crack down aggressively on speech don't tend to end up on the 'right side of history' either.
            • 2y ago
• snickerbockers 2y ago
  So how is this any different from all the random employees who might have access to this data as part of their jobs? I would understand if there was this sort of scrutiny over every federal employee but as it stands I never know who has access to my data and if they can be trusted.
  • pyrale 2y ago
    I strongly suspect no single employee had access to all that data.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  • thebeardisred 2y ago
    This is generally quite restricted. I personally had to undego a "Public trust" civilian security clearance (which is binding for life unlike the 75 years of TS-SCI).
    • imafish 2y ago
      And do we know the DOGE employees don’t undergo this?
      • drawfloat 2y ago
        Given the little background we know of the employees includes a guy who was fired for leaking secrets, I think it’s safe to say they didn’t
        • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
          It's surreal arguing with people like this. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93q625y04wo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93q625y04wo
      • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
• mandmandam 2y ago
  The moment they had physical access to the system, it was necessary to assume this. It's called an 'evil maid' attack, and of all communities this one should have been blowing the whistle. Loudly, repeatedly, and in open defiance of people who argue that this is a storm in a teacup, a non issue, just another MOT, etc. Especially when you look at the background of the Doge team - 'ex' hackers, 'security specialists', full-on racists... Perhaps surprisingly, the CEO of YC and Paul Graham have been publicly supportive of the DOGE team, despite all the racism and existential threat. I don't know if that's from fear, or greed, but there are strong arguments for both. Some of the stories about this topic which have been flagged here can be seen in my favorites. I'd be interested in collecting more examples, if you know of any missing. > In the coming weeks, the team is expected to enter IT systems at the CDC and Federal Aviation Administration, and it already has done so at NASA, according to sources we’ve spoken with at each of those agencies. At least one DOGE ally appears to be working to open back doors into systems used throughout the federal government. If discussing this openly and often this isn't possible due to very simple flag abuse, then what is this community actually even worth.
  • imafish 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • matwood 2y ago
      > Can someone explain to me where the issue lies? I'm starting to wonder if HN has also been taken over by bots and astroturfers. Audits require transparency and people who know wtf they are doing. Musk and his team have shown none of either. They have repeatedly talked about what they think they found that was later shown to be false. Instead of correcting course they double down (see the recent story of 8B vs 8M or Musk saying 10s of millions of dead people getting social security, there are many more that come out daily). They have also fought against efforts to increase transparency into what they are doing through a number of ways, either taking down datasets that could be cross checked or moving DOGE under the records act to avoid FOIA until 2032. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/upshot/doge-contracts-musk-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/upshot/doge-contracts-mus... https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/musk-misreads-social-security-data-millions-dead-people/story?id=118960821 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/musk-misreads-social-securit... https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/politics/trump-musk-doge-foia-public-records.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/politics/trump-musk-do...
• kfrzcode 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • cmurf 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • Aeolun 2y ago
      As much as I want that last paragraph to be true… the results speak for themselves.
    • dang 2y ago
      Could you please stop posting flamewar and ideological battle comments? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
  • dang 2y ago
    Could you please stop posting flamewar and ideological battle comments? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Also: please don't use 'edit' to do deletions that deprive replies of context. That's unfair to readers.
• karel-3d 2y ago
  Honestly when DOGE was first announced, I thought it will be a tiny department that does almost nothing and produces recommendations and PDFs that nobody reads. I didn't expect this.
  • scarab92 2y ago
    Musk isn't a do-things-by-half kind of guy.
    • cm2187 2y ago
      But also when you make cuts, you go hard, fast, and recover from there. Any effort of small trimming over a long period achieves no saving while producing the same negative publicity. I doubt such cutting effort will happen for another 30y. There is a french say I like. If you need to cut a dog’s tail, don’t cut an inch every day, chop the whole thing quick
      • Cthulhu_ 2y ago
        This isn't just cuts though, this is dismantling checks and balances, international relationships, and many people will die from this.
        • pjc50 2y ago
          Several employees have already been put at risk: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/foreign-service-worker-sues-trump-pregnant-wife-faces-life-threatening-rcna192599 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/foreign-servic... Dismantling USAID overnight will do a lot of damage.
      • intended 2y ago
        Same thing for butchery. Cut the carcass and sell the parts.
      • Smithalicious 2y ago
        The French, famous for their budget cuts and government efficiency.
• lucasRW 2y ago
  Isn't this the idea of an audit ?...
  • fraggleysun 2y ago
    Wouldn’t you expect some sort of forensic accountant leading an audit of a multi trillion dollar organization?
    • lucasRW 2y ago
      No
      • harrisontbooth 2y ago
        Why not?
  • randerson 2y ago
    An audit only needs read access, not God mode. It should be conducted by a neutral third party, not someone on a witch hunt who has conflicts of interest. The people on the ground should have auditing qualifications, clear background checks, and knowledge of specific systems or processes, not a random 19-year-old named "Big Balls" with a history of selling company secrets to a competitor. Their findings should go through QA, and they should take the time to come up with an accurate report, rather than rushing through and blurting out whatever they think is happening.
    • _1tem 2y ago
      Ah, so more bureaucracy, bureaucracy, bureaucracy.
      • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
        This response is so funny to me. You'll be on your knees begging for bureaucracy after all your info is sold to the highest bidder and you spend the next 20 years fighting identity theft.
• jongjong 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • computerthings 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • iszomer 2y ago
    If Tim Cook had that same perceived power, I imagine the narrative would be playing out differently.
  • techorange 2y ago
    “Now at least I get to watch horrible people get a dose of their own medicine” Doge is not being this careful, in fact I’d argue that Doge will disproportionately impact people not on your target list. All the “horrible” people you don’t like are going to be “punished” with lucrative contracts in the private sector while line workers, most of whom may agree with you suffer
• maCDzP 2y ago
  European here, giving my two cents on how this looks from the other side of the Atlantic. Heh In my country there are laws stopping agencies doing a simple SQL join between two databases, even within the same government agency. There is a separate agency that handles the requests when agencies want to join information. I am not an expert in the matter. But my gut is telling me that our experiences with east Germany and Stasi left a scar. It can quickly turn into a real nightmare, and there for there are check and balances to make it slow. It’s deliberate inefficiency.
  • scarab92 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • alt227 2y ago
      Except that they, an unelected private group, have already attempted to get all private and confidential citizen data from the US treasury, and have been blocked by the courts as it is illegal. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/08/judge-temporarily-blocks-musks-doge-team-from-accessing-treasury-records https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/08/judge-tem... They have tried to get data of all payments to US citizens including pensions, 401k, benefits and allowances etc. All foreign aid and diplomacy payments are included, and they have been charged with trying to find ways to illegaly stop these payments. Be very careful in supporting what Musk and DOGE do. They are unelected, and have been given unprecedented access to government data. Scary times are ahead.
      • scarab92 2y ago
        [flagged]
        • MourYother 2y ago
          [flagged]
          • 2y ago
• amriksohata 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • jokoon 2y ago
    I'm worried that one of Musk friends might be a Chinese or Russian spy.
    • zimpenfish 2y ago
      > I'm worried that one of Musk friends might be a Chinese or Russian spy. Given Musk's ties to China and his overt friendship with Putin, I don't think there's a need for one of his friends to be a spy when he's right there with a glowing neon finger over his head.
• frigg 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • lazyasciiart 2y ago
    Even completely ignoring the dubious ethics invoked - a lot of non Americans will get worse outcomes than the US because of this. Given the work that has been cancelled so far, some of those non Americans are likely already dead.
  • amelius 2y ago
    Most people probably wanted "change" and there was no alternative option. If your democracy offers only two options, then polarization is the outcome.
  • zimpenfish 2y ago
    > You Americans voted for this A thin majority in an election with a poor (and/or constrained) turnout in a lop-sided nonsense of an electoral system with disproportionate weightings voted for parts of this.
    • Amezarak 2y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States... The 2024 election had historically high turnout. The 2nd highest turnout since 1968, the 7th highest since 1932. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States...
      • defrost 2y ago
        Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. Voter turnout nationally in 2024 was 63.9 percent (below the 66.6 percent voter turnout recorded in 2020). So 31.8 percent of the eligible voters in the USofA voted for Trump in the 2024 elections, most eligible voters didn't vote for Trump. Eligible Voters aside, an even greater percentage of people in the USofA didn't vote for Trump being too young or otherwise disenfranchised. Of those that did vote for Trump it's a leap to say that all of them voted to fire the chief government records keeper, to empower DOGE to gut departments, etc; like Brexit, many of those who voted for it had no real idea what they had voted for. In the campaign Trump ran to avoid jail he repeatedly stated he wasn't aware of the Project 2025 playbook, that he would be all things to all people. People who voted for Trump voted for what they heard, what they thought he promised. Most of the citizens in the USofA did not vote Trump, not all of those voted to gut the government, the sciences, foreign aid, etc.
• theowiop 2y ago
  [flagged]
• aurelien 2y ago
  [flagged]
• tremarley 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • intended 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • bilvar 2y ago
      > Reality has a famously left wing bias. That's a bit ironic given leftist claims that men can become women and vice-versa.
      • intended 2y ago
        Sure. But right now what do care more about - the nitty gritty details of 1) The way software and projects at DOGE are going 2) “leftist claims that men can become women and vice-versa.” This is a fundamentally a distracting question. It may give you mental relief (Yahh the other team is dumb, Reality is dumb) Great! Take the breather. But then talk about 1. I get that things are polarized. I get that there is an INTENT behind it. But you’ve got all 3 branches of government. You have the ability to actually make this work. Why THIS approach. What are the accountability checks and balances? Are they just creating a new talking point to bounce down the years??? Did people get the required clearances? If not, why were the clearances there? IF yes, How are they making sure this is not going to be FUBARED. How is responsibility going to be allocated? Are we going to have this over our heads for all generations to come? A new political ball to punt blame? How do we get accountability for what - even to you - must look like the wrong way to do things.
        • bilvar 2y ago
          I was just responding to a dubious assertion with a clear counter-example. As for DOGE, I live in a different country and not really care to be frank, as an external observer the US is a testbed. We will see what kinds of results going all guns blazing to reduce fraud in government, instead of asking nicely, will produce in due time. As your leftist friend said, you need to break some eggs to make an omelette.
• eecc 2y ago
  IMHO it's a bit of a shame that the productivity and efficiency gains that computing and cybernetics can bring to complex systems -- including government -- are always tainted and currently championed by anti-social elites that use them to break apart these collective machines. Bureaucracies are a common good, and it should be in everyone's interest to apply state-of-the-art system engineering to make them as valuable as currently possible.
  • glutamate 2y ago
    Didn't know Max Weber was lurking on HN.
    • ffsm8 2y ago
      It's true if you're ignoring the no-true-scottman fallacy. Bureaucracy doesn't have to be to the detriment of society. As a matter of fact, it can potentially put breaks on the worst exploitative behavior. But over time... It has the potential to grow too much with bad legislation, effectively making the positive potential into a very real negative that stifles unnecessarily.
      • analog31 2y ago
        So far all of the bad things I've heard about our system, such as the economic unsustainability and now this, are effects that will happen in the perpetual future.
        • vlovich123 2y ago
          You have to think about who you’re listening too. The economic sustainability of the actions Trump has taken so far is a pittance: * The beauracracy today is about the size it was in 1980 on a per capita basis. It’s not the largest per capita it’s ever been. > The federal government’s workforce has remained largely unchanged in size for over 50 years, even as the U.S. population has grown by 68% and federal spending has quintupled, highlighting the critical role of technology and contractors in filling the gap. > Compensation for federal employees cost $291 billion in 2019, or 6.6% of that year’s total spending So firing everyone is a 6% improvement to the federal budget while a complete government collapse for a number of reasons including that the government won’t have anyone to collect revenue or prosecute crimes. [1] * The largest discretionary spending area is the military at 800 billion in 2023. Of that, personnel accounted for 173 billion, or 20%. Personnel is a tiny fraction of the government’s spend each year. Even [2] which is a right wing think tank supporting this effort, claims that the liabilities improvement is 600B over 10 years which makes it a <1% dent seeing as how we spend >6T each year and just hand-waves the pension improvement as “significant”. But cuts aren’t focusing on the biggest employer within the government like the military. * The people Trump & Musk are firing now are people who haven’t been on the job long enough to have protections. This drastically reduces the numbers above as a best case since that assumes a uniform 10% reduction across all salary bands whereas the current 10% reduction is almost certainly across the lowest bands since the government pays based on seniority. This is what Trump does - he often identifies a real problem and then does a sleight of hand trick to make you think the actions he’s taking, because they’re highly visible, are solving the problem when in fact he’s not actually making any meaningful dent. That’s why he made a big show about the deportation flights but not talking about how the places he’s sending them to aren’t the places the people are from - he’s bullied Costa Rica into accepting whoever he send [3]. [1] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/is-government-too-big-reflections-on-the-size-and-composition-of-todays-federal-government/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/is-government-too-big-ref... [2] https://epicforamerica.org/education-workforce-retirement/fiscal-effects-of-reducing-the-federal-workforce/ https://epicforamerica.org/education-workforce-retirement/fi... [3] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/us-deportation-flight-costa-rica-asian-migrants-san-jose-rcna192902 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/us-deportation-fl...
• kjrfghslkdjfl 2y ago
  [dead]
• borgster 2y ago
  The President is the head of the executive branch. If _anyone_ in the executive branch has access to information, it feels like the presidents office should too. Why is this hard to accept?
  • ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    Because it's Musk following his own agenda and he apparently isn't the president
    • snvzz 2y ago
      Musk is acting with full president support.
      • dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
        Doesn't mean either are acting within the law
  • jonahbenton 2y ago
    Because it isn't the case. For good reason. So it isn't acceptable. Spend some educating yourself about security standards like FedRAMP and build a mental model of things that are or have been true, and the reasons they were made so.
  • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
    > If _anyone_ in the executive branch has access to information, it feels like the presidents office should too. Are you an idiot? Can you point to the last time some foreigner was given access to American's personal data without any oversight?
    • Extropy_ 2y ago
      Elon Musk has Canadian, US, and South-African citizenship
• weregiraffe 2y ago
  Surely it's 'dog mode'
• ElonChrist 2y ago
  [dead]
• greatgib 2y ago
  Just imagine one second if Poutine really have a file on Trump and this is the ultimate holdup to give Russia access to all US systems...
• belter 2y ago
  Here is my prediction...I know nobody asked for it :-) But they are only fun if you make them before the events...A massive, unpriced risk looms over financial markets... Its scale defies prediction. The current administration’s safeguards are faltering, running like a government still in FSD beta. With U.S. debt dismissed as “just debt,” inflationary tariffs in play, and an emergency Fed rate hike imminent, shockwaves are inevitable. Deficit panic may soon lead to manipulated figures and a narrative bent to suit unstable agendas. The bond market’s credibility will collapse, making the Liz Truss debacle seem trivial compared to the turmoil expected over the next two years. Even the most sophisticated hedge funds and quants can’t quantify an administration gone off the rails... But just look at the current price of gold... The narrative already started: "Trump says US may have less debt than thought because of fraud - Trump says some Treasury payments might 'not count'" - https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/trump-says-us-might-have-less-debt-than-thought-2025-02-09/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/trump-says-us-might-have-... "The World’s Most Important Market Sends a Warning" - https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-02-18/the-world-s-most-important-market-sends-inflation-warning https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-02-18/the-wo...
  • javcasas 2y ago
    > Trump says US may have less debt than thought because of fraud - Trump says some Treasury payments might 'not count' Ugh, is that different words for "we ain't paying this because we say it's fraud"?
    • Extropy_ 2y ago
      A lot of Government contracts that are on the surface multi-million, even billion dollars, aren't payed out immediately in full. Thus, at first glance it may look like they've spent more than has left their pockets
  • verzali 2y ago
    Yes, the real check on Trump isn't congress or the courts any more, it is the bond markets. It they get scared, he is in big trouble.
• kombine 2y ago
  "In the coming weeks, the team is expected to enter IT systems at the CDC and Federal Aviation Administration, and it already has done so at NASA" If this isn't a glaring conflict of interest and corruption, I don't know what is.
  • bitlax 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • marcosdumay 2y ago
      > Even though there isn't a single moment in history they can point to that's similar In US history, maybe. But you can look at the raise to power of almost any dictatorship, you'll find the same exact concep of cleptocrats taking unrestricted access to whatever entity used to fight them.
      • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
        > But you can look at the raise to power of almost any dictatorship, you'll find the same exact concep of cleptocrats taking unrestricted access to whatever entity used to fight them. Good point.
      • diob 2y ago
        Yeah, a lot of folks think the USA is untouchable and "it can't happen here", but so many other countries felt the exact same way. You're fine until one day, you aren't. There's no magical barrier making the USA immune to things other nations have experienced.
        • SXX 2y ago
          Lots and lots of guns available to population is the best safeguard. It's hard to build authoritarian government let alone dictatorship when so much of population is armed. And there is no way Trump will go against gun ownership rights.
• calrain 2y ago
  Are they really just going to use this to train AI models, to build the 'GrokGovAI' models?
• dzdt 2y ago
  Related to a comment on a now-flagged subthread: can anyone who believes that DOGE is uncovering fraud please post a reliable reference that gives a specific example of fraud uncovered by DOGE? To be clear, this should be a third-party analysis of some credibility, not DOGE's or Musk's twitter feed or "receipts" website which shows cancelled contracts with no clear link to fraudulent activity.
  • onemoresoop 2y ago
    They will twist the narrative and not provide any evidence. I appreciate your request but please don’t be naive. Have you heard of trolling?
    • xtiansimon 2y ago
      I’m happy with a description of a higher standard than, say, a Reddit discussion.
    • grobbyy 2y ago
      There is widespread fraud in the government. It needs to be addressed. There is widespread inefficiency too. I think the people in DOGE have the skills and access to address it. I have no evidence that they are doing so, and some evidence of widespread loyalty tests which, while not identical, remind me of how Stalin came to power. However, absence if evidence is not evidence of absence, and some evidence is not the same as proof. I have dozens of explanations which fit the facts, and I don't have any way to determine which, if any, is correct.
      • croes 2y ago
        I bet much of this fraud benefits big donors of both parties. I doubt they will fix that
        • abirch 2y ago
          Some government jobs were basically UBI. They provided incomes in rural America.
• greenie_beans 2y ago
  i hope they try to use cjis data bc it's taken me 6 months to build a system that is technically compliant and it still doesn't fully pass. they definitely will fail the data security policy requirements.
  • mrbigbob 2y ago
    This isnt a dig at you but something i have noticed over the last few weeks. People keep saying X/Y wont be able to do something because of rules, laws, requirements and i have to keep reminding people rules/laws are only as good as those willing to enforce them
    • greenie_beans 2y ago
      fair point! i guess it does sound like an inept democrat lol. though you don't wanna fuck with the fbi https://le.fbi.gov/cjis-division/cjis-security-policy-resource-center https://le.fbi.gov/cjis-division/cjis-security-policy-resour...
      • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
        The FBI reports to the president. They aren't going to stop anything.
        • greenie_beans 2y ago
          well, at least they are trying: https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/fbi-class-action.pdf https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/fbi-...
• Nemrod67 2y ago
  [flagged]
• mrayycombi 2y ago
  I think I have a hunch what Trump is going to do next. He's going to fill these fired probationary workers with new loyal probationary workers hand picked by him. He will then make these new probationary workers in charge of the agency. If they don't do what he wants, they can be fired at will.
  • Loughla 2y ago
    I disagree. He'll wait until things start breaking, use that as more reason that government isn't effective, and start selling the parts to new, different contractors. I legitimately believe his reasoning is money and ego pumping. But mostly money. This is basic disaster economics, but with a self-made disaster instead of a natural disaster.
    • mrayycombi 2y ago
      I don't disagree, I think some disasters will be or are being made. However, he needs these groups to some extent to roll back regulations. He can't be assured existing people will play ball. So with hand picked cronies with no job security pushed to run the show over the ones with some job security he can push for deregulation. If disasters happen along the way he can blame Brandon er Biden, etc and sell a heroic fix for profits.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    Yes, good.
• kardianos 2y ago
  I actually believe the executive branch should actually control the executive branch.
  • zizwulfine 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • nxobject 2y ago
    I, on the other hand, would prefer the executive branch to have a modicum of process and transparency when trying to access private information, as opposed to learning of things a week after the fact from leaks.
    • kardianos 2y ago
      Is that your preference or what the constitution says?
  • bullfightonmars 2y ago
    The presidency is not a monarchy! The president might be commander-in-chief but it can’t just order random people killed just because he is “in charge” of the military. There are laws and layers of control saying who can do what. These laws are on the books and are being completely ignored! Most of this power is vested in congress whom is abdicating their power.
    • kardianos 2y ago
      In a sense, I agree. The president should not be able to declare war without an act of Congress. The constitution grants the power to make law to congress, but then congress has enacted many laws which create agencies under the executive branch, which in turns empowers the executive branch. So I agree that Congress should make/repeal laws that reduce the size of the executive branch so that only necessary powers are entrusted to the executive branch. However, until that day comes, the separation of powers is the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. Within the executive, inward looking (not external like killing people), yeah, the president and his appointed cabinet should have control. Without that control, you are defining an unaccountable form of government.
• thrownaway561 2y ago
  I honestly have not a single idea why there wasn't this type of department before monitoring and auditing everything.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
    >> I honestly have not a single idea why there wasn't this type of department before monitoring and auditing everything. You mean like the Government Accountability Office? [1] Or the dozens of Inspector Generals at most agencies? [2] [1] https://www.gao.gov/ https://www.gao.gov/ [2] https://www.oversight.gov/where-report-fraud-waste-abuse-or-retaliation https://www.oversight.gov/where-report-fraud-waste-abuse-or-... The US federal government has lots of laws, agencies, and procedures to address, investigate, and remediate fraud, waste, and abuse.
    • Capricorn2481 2y ago
      It's like people think every agency just got infinite money until Musk came in.
    • thrownaway561 2y ago
      And they have been doing a bang up job. Bottom line is that this sort of transparency was needed in the last administration.
      • popularrecluse 2y ago
        Chump
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    Because then they would have found the fraud, and some very powerful people would be out of money....
• UI_at_80x24 2y ago
  Why not just say they have root access? 'god mode' is a ridiculous expression and just obscures the truth. I get that some people need information dumbed down but this is pathetic.
• ck2 2y ago
  Federal level government is not a startup Breaking things will destroy lives if not literally kill people If it was this "easy" someone would have made a proposal years ago even if it was turned down And Congress, not ANY President controls spending We do not elect Kings in this country, there was an entire very brutal war to make it that way This data is going to leak if it's not copied already into insecure sources and every foreign adversary is going to have it Cannot be undone And there should be investigations and prosecutions for this to prevent it ever happening again by ANY President
  • MyneOutside 2y ago
    Well put and straight to the point.
  • KittenInABox 2y ago
    > Breaking things will destroy lives if not literally kill people It is already killing people. They fired people giving out food and medicine. They fired people on suicide hotlines. And of course, people have been killing themselves in response to being fired.
• _1tem 2y ago
  Well, it is a government agency tasked with audits. Why shouldn't it have root access?
  • barkerja 2y ago
    Therein lies the problem: it's not a government agency, at least not without Congressional approval.
  • djaychela 2y ago
    Is it an actual government agency? From what I've (casually) read, it's an ad-hoc thing that isn't actually genuinely legitimate, from that standpoint?
    • mexicocitinluez 2y ago
      It's not. But pseudo-intellects and idiots are still under Elon's spell.
    • redeux 2y ago
      Technically DOGE is part of the United States Digital Service (USDS)
    • rufus_foreman 2y ago
      >> Is it an actual government agency? Yes. In 2014, after the disastrous rollout of the Healthcare.gov site, President Obama created the "United States Digital Service" (USDS). Its stated mission was to modernize technology and improve efficiency across all US departments and agencies. President Trump renamed the USDS to the "United States DOGE Service" (USDS) and created a temporary "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) organization within the USDS that will operate until July 4, 2026. Every US government agency is required to establish a DOGE team within that agency to work with the USDS to "improve the quality and efficiency of government-wide software, network infrastructure, and information technology (IT) systems".
    • snvzz 2y ago
      >Is it an actual government agency? Yes. With full support from the recently democratically elected president of the united states.
• sebastianconcpt 2y ago
  Nice :)
• josefritzishere 2y ago
  Doooooooooooooooooooooooom
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• ClownsAbound 2y ago
  [dead]
• redeux 2y ago
  Does anyone else see the eery comparison between the name DOGE (department of government efficiency) and the things Orwell warned about in 1984? It seems very prescient, but I know this isn't the first time in history that regimes have played this game.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • dennis_jeeves2 2y ago
    It did cross my mind ( like ministry of truth in 1984). But I suspect it's just a coincidence. Overall I think, in my judgement DM/EM have been transparent, at least significantly more than their detractors.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• gattr 2y ago
  Perhaps the whole situation will finally convince the "I don't mind, I have nothing to hide" crowd about the need to scrutinize & limit as much as reasonably possible the personal data collection and retention by government and other entities. What good are rules, statutes, checks & balances, passwords and ACLs, if at some point someone you don't like or trust can just come in "as a root" and circumvent everything?
  • 542354234235 2y ago
    I don't have anything to hide but I still close the door when I take a dump.
  • BargirPezza 2y ago
    I actually thought the government had all this control already over all this.
  • shinytinstone 2y ago
    [dead]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • nerdponx 2y ago
    The "I don't mind, I have nothing to hide" people are cheering this on. They don't know or care about any of the things you just said.
    • ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
      Do you have cause to believe "nothing to hide" is a partisan position? I'd expect that half of such people are on the left and are critical by default of the new administration. Seems to be supported by the second chart here: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/10/18/how-americans-view-data-privacy/ https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/10/18/how-american...
      • 2y ago
• torpfactory 2y ago
  Hear me out. Elon wants ultimate control over people’s lives and choices. Why he would want this is a psychological question about which we can only speculate. This is a change from (at least in appearance) his previous libertarian leanings. Whatever the case, this is the plan: 1) Acquire god mode access to government systems and citizens information (contacting, grants, spending, taxes, SSI benefits, you name it). 2) Add features to the Treasury Department’s software to allow him to, with extremely high granularity, control what payments go out. Friends can be rewarded, enemies punished. At first it will take the form of government entities he doesn’t like (USAID, for example). Next will be government opposition in our federal system, mostly blue cities and states with whom he disagrees. Next will be large private entities with whom he disagrees or are business competitors. Finally, individuals opposing him or the government will be personally targeted (for example, by not paying SSI benefits or paying out tax returns, perhaps extended to family members of the opposition, etc). These individual sanctions could extend to large geographic area he dislikes (all of coastal California, for example). He’s putting in place the tools to accomplish this right now as we speak. 3) Fire all bureaucratic opposition elements who might prevent this. Dress it up as a government efficiency measure if you like. 4) Eventually they will pressure large (and maybe small, too) private financial institutions to take part in this scheme (they may have already succeeded, see Citibank and NYC federal funding for migrants). He’s putting in place the tools for total control by controlling access to money and resources. I don’t exactly know what he plans to do with them but I don’t want to find out given constant interaction with racists and neo nazis on his site.
  • nprateem 2y ago
    It's pretty obvious isn't it? Trump stacked the Supreme Court the first time round which turned out to be the best thing he ever did. Now they'll control payments to defund opponents as well as sacking anyone who doesn't support them to gain total loyalty. In fact, the way they're doing this is clever: Sack and then make former colleagues compete to be rehired. That way they'll feel extra grateful to have a job and will toe the line in future. I expect they'll use this data for leverage against opponents in future. They probably haven't decided how yet, which is why they're in hoover mode. Loot the systems quick while they still can. But it's ok. Half the US thinks there's nothing to worry about. Good luck getting fair elections ever again.
• theflimflamguy 2y ago
  Move fast and break things meets root kernel access to government. What could go wrong?
• adam12 2y ago
  "Do I file my taxes this year or not? I had to sit and debate that." good question
• pkdpic 2y ago
  Is this the sort of data that could be useful in training LLMs or in terms of demographic data that would be valuable to advertisers?
  • erellsworth 2y ago
    I'm certain it's both.
  • lithos 2y ago
    DMVs already sell your demographics and contact information to advertisers. Along with attempts at making this illegal being stopped by Washington (IE Washington considers it their free speech to call you with the bought information).
• gcr 2y ago
  Imagine: if you dunk on Elon on Twitter now he could get mad and post your tax return in the replies
  • cristiancavalli 2y ago
    What’s beyond a man who would lie about being a gamer (for credz), be so lazy in his lie he is instantly caught, double-down on his lie despite the obviousness of his inability to even use basic mechanics of said games and then beef with Internet personalities while leaking their private convos? I would wager this man has absolutely no ethic and is purely concerned with his own short-sighted greed and vanity.
• lucasyvas 2y ago
  Because there are bigger fish to fry, I think people don’t appreciate the sheer cost of the system rebuild that will be required for security reasons later. There’s absolutely no telling what additional software has been installed alongside existing, or which systems have been modified that would require audit. Purging this will be an absolute fucking nightmare to the American taxpayer. This may turn into one of the most significant IT incidents in world history.
  • laserbeam 2y ago
    And there's no telling how many backups they compromised (let's be generous and assume backups exist).
  • thih9 2y ago
    > The team could then feed this classified information into AI tools, either for training purposes or to mine the data for insights. (Members of DOGE already reportedly have put sensitive data from the Education Department into AI software.) Perhaps it's cheaper to assume everything leaked or will leak soon.
    • lucasyvas 2y ago
      Even if you were to argue AI systems would eventually have a place in government, which they almost certainly would have anyway long term, the sheer carelessness and lack of oversight of its implementation by a private citizen and group of individuals of proven, questionable ethics is enough reason in itself to have to burn the forest down. Thinking of it objectively, almost nobody here can say they would stand for this at any company they worked at or ran. This is not an acceptable IT practice no matter which side of the fence you are currently sitting on - allowing an unvetted entity to modify your internal systems without audit or oversight is completely absurd.
      • CyrsBel 2y ago
        You are correct. And the nonchalant way in which the leaders who are supposed to oversee this thing are treating it is appalling. It will have consequences during mid-terms and beyond. It is clear that some people believe elected office to mean that they are then given authority and rights with which to increase in...being voyeurs rather than visionaries???
• emsign 2y ago
  DOGE is a joke
  • snvzz 2y ago
    With god mode, it isn't a joke.
  • hermitShell 2y ago
    With ‘dog mode’ access to government IT systems
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    People being convinced it's a bad idea, By the same politicians and beaurocrats who have wasting, laundering and getting kickbacks, They are the joke. "Blame the smoke detector, not the fire" people are demoralised people driven insane
• moffers 2y ago
  I can understand feeling wary because someone may be watching your work, but conceivably this was always the case? I know it’s uncomfortable having this agency with no oversight gaining access to systems within the government, but it’s got to be huge right? I’m sure Elon’s tapped some smart fellas to be bulls in this china shop, but there’s no way they can put an eye on every single piece of information that flies through all of the systems of the federal government. You’d need a huge staff, tools to be built, never mind trying to solidify all those interfaces. It seems more likely that they’ll gain access to all these systems, be completely overwhelmed about what to do, and then do small things that wouldn’t actually have an impact but would gain headlines, and then call it a day.
  • electrondood 2y ago
    "Smart fellas"? The guy is a billionaire, and all he can find are a few 20-years old edgelords with names like "Big Balls" who make racist comments in online forums?
    • moffers 2y ago
      Sorry, that was intended to be facetious
• axus 2y ago
  Government should have access to its own data. Justice and Congress should have the same access for oversight. The only problem I see is personal data about non-government people is being exposed to the entire planet. They should have developed good security practices first and maybe spent more than a week reviewing a plan, and not having a double standard about their own activities.
  • dimal 2y ago
    > Government should have access to its own data. Justice and Congress should have the same access for oversight. On its face, that’s a reasonable comment. But that’s not what’s happening here. This is not oversight. This is the world’s richest man arbitrarily seizing control of the government’s data. He’s able to do this because he bought the presidency for Trump. Are you ok with that?
    • axus 2y ago
      I blame the people who were bought as much as the buyer, and the Citizens United decision for facilitating the buying. I'm OK with democratic elections and executive appointments. I'm OK with the "read access" part of the control, the "write access" should only go as far as the laws passed by Congress permit.
  • IggleSniggle 2y ago
    The thing is, Government already had access to its own data. It just was required to follow the law that was put in place by the voted in Legislature to prevent abusive situations that could arise from limitless unrestricted access without oversight. It was there, and even non-government citizens could get access to it by following the procedures; procedures put in place to prevent "selling the farm," voted on by elected officials, with the support of their constituents.
  • acdha 2y ago
    The government already had access to its data, including oversight and regular auditing. This was solely about removing the safeguards so they didn’t have to follow good security practices or have a plan, and given how intensely politicized it has been it’s hard not to think that’s because the plan is not something they’d want to document where the public could see. As an example, Musk mislead the public with claims about Social Security fraud. None of that was unknown, and in fact the independent inspector general had a much better quality report years ago where they confirmed that the old records did not show signs of fraud and recommended paths for improvement. DOGE made a lot of noise but added nothing but risk. https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf
• goshx 2y ago
  Don’t they need security clearances to do this?
  • FranzFerdiNaN 2y ago
    King Trump says they dont.
  • delecti 2y ago
    Legally, probably. But in the US, "legally" is enforced by the executive, and that's who's telling them to comply.
    • lesuorac 2y ago
      To be clear, Security Clearances is just an EO thing. The actual laws just speak about things being critical to national security and don't use the words like "Top Secret" and etc. The whole actually labeling things "Top Secret" and etc started off with Clinton [1] but then Bush [2] and Obama [3] modified the rules around classification. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12958 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12958 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13292 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13292 [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526
      • cryptonector 2y ago
        "Top Secret" goes back a long ways, to before WWII I believe.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    They do. Elon already had top secret due to NASA/military work. The rest were authorised/given clearance for the work.
    • goshx 2y ago
      In a matter of days?
• FigurativeVoid 2y ago
  At my first gig, I had "god" level access to our production database. All I learned is that nobody should have this level of access unless it is some sort of temporary break glass situation. It is extremely dangerous and even experienced engineers can cause irreparable data loss or some other bad outcome. In our case, some engineer accidentally sent around 10,000 invoices to customers that shouldn't have gotten them. There are far better data access patterns. In the case of US gov data, I don't see why the DOGE team would need anything more than a read replica to query. It could even be obfuscated in some way to protect citizens' identities.
  • neycoda 2y ago
    Why should they even have read access? They're not a legal government institution, and they're being led by a private citizen that's not been elected or appointed by Congress to access our data in agencies that were made by Congress under particular rules to keep these kinds of snoops out.
  • cratermoon 2y ago
    I loathe working places where they just give you all the permissions because it's "easier". One risk is if something does happen, and they don't have exceptional tracing and logging, (and let's be honest, at an organization sloppy enough to hand out privileges like candy, what's the chance of that?) it's difficult or impossible to pin down the source to any individual. As a result, both responsibility and suspicion is diffuse.
    • JohnFen 2y ago
      I agree. Good access controls and being prevented from accessing things that I don't need access to protect me as an employee just as much as the data itself.
    • FigurativeVoid 2y ago
      I have so many horror stories from there. When they did decide to lock down the database, the DB admin only locked in down in the sql server client most people used. If you used some other client, you still had access. _sigh_
• electrondood 2y ago
  What is the point of all of this? Reducing federal income taxes? It seems to me that these people are pushing a rope if that's the goal. For example, USAID is 1% of federal spending, but buys the US a disproportionate amount of soft power and good will for that investment. Also, why 20-year olds? You'd think a person as resourced as Musk would have access to more capable people. When I was 20 years old I didn't know a thing about the Federal government or all the ways it benefits Americans. I don't see DOGE solving an actual problem, and even if it did, this is a horribly incompetent way to go about it.
  • tech_ken 2y ago
    > What is the point of all of this? Just my opinion, but the most obvious motives seem to be: * Breaking the back of the institutional opposition Trump experienced in his previous term * Flexing strength and creating a narrative of unitary executive power
  • myheartisinohio 2y ago
    We are adding 1 trillion dollars to the deficit every 100 days.
• thrownaway561 2y ago
  [flagged]
• bzmrgonz 2y ago
  call me Naive and paint me a fool, but I do think this is going to go down as Musk's lifetime achievement. Think about it, he has money, he has arguably built great companies, and now, for his masterpiece, he can, and I honestly believe he will.....CURE DEMOCRACY. I want him to succeed, because the next logical giant is CAPITALISM, and that one, in the collective interest of humanity, and planetary survival, needs FIXING!! Almost every system created by man, eventually turns corrupt, because for some reason we interfere, we want to tip the balance, instead of give free will and life to the things we create. The ecology of a system should be self-regulating, that's how NATURE operates.
  • notepad0x90 2y ago
    cure democracy? they just broke it. did you vote for musk? did anyone? are you thinking right? A fascist dictator just ruined america for good and this can't be fixed. Just the reputation of america alone is ruined for generations to come, and I bet you are not even thinking of what "reputation" means, it isn't "like me please" type of a reputation but "let's avoid wars and trade with each other" reputation. I honestly think people like you deserve the america these evil people are creating, too bad the rest of us are stuck with you. You just lost our country and you have no idea what a precious and wonderful thing we've lost. You put your trust in a greedy evil billionaire, foolishness for the history books.
    • bzmrgonz 2y ago
      It doesn't sound like you are in an emotional state to have this discussion, which is ok, but the findings are undeniable. I don't see anyone arguing, "they're making up the fraud". So from an objective point of view, an audit of this magnitude has been dreamt of by both parties for decades, heck probably going back a century. No one has been able to do it, lacking either collective will, or, more famously, bureaucratic pushback. My argument is, and you can ask any senior or experienced executive this(tho I think it's actually an accounting principle), anyways...when a top level professional arrives at a new job/department/unit/etc, the first order of business is "finding your salary", this is essentially your brain finding your salary among the waste or leaks in the space you were asked to manage. This is what DOGE is tasked with, no matter the cost, stopping the waste will pay for the cost, even if it cost trillions(which I highly doubt), you can amortize that and still get USA's bottom line in the black.
• buttocks 2y ago
  Musk would have liked to be the US president but can’t because he’s South African. So he conned the stupidest but most powerful man alive into letting him be acting president.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    You have to stop being your information from CNN and Reddit. It destroys your critical thinking skills and ultimately drives some people insane
• swat535 2y ago
  Setting politics aside for a moment, I find it fascinating that an audit of this scale is taking place within the government. Has there ever been a historical precedent where an external agency thoroughly reviewed all departments, published its findings for the public, and then based decisions on that analysis? Is it really possible to root out governmental fraud using this approach? Fraud and theft exist at every level of government, but if not through a drastic measure like this, what else can be done? Relying on the status quo, the courts, and current processes hasn’t yielded substantial results—if it had, corruption wouldn’t persist. Still, I can appreciate the creativity here. Sometimes it takes an outsider to think differently. That said, I’m not naive enough to assume this is done entirely in good faith. The prevailing opinion—both in this community and the media—seems largely negative; I’ve yet to see a single positive headline. Even so, I find it intriguing. So here’s my question: if you were in charge of addressing this problem, how would you tackle it differently?
  • tgv 2y ago
    Idk about the US, but the 'government' fraud that I know of, does not show up in the tax office records or in the foreign aid accounts. The common thing is that civil servants/officials are bribed. At usually on the cheap too, so it'll take a lot of digging to find it, and worse, prove it. But, this kind of corruption is probably even more widespread among companies. If you want to exact justice, that's the place to look.
    • yreg 2y ago
      In private companies people probably consider the issue to be 'less wrong'. It's up to the owners and their management how they run it, right? So it's more about discrimination than government-style corruption.
    • NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
      >The common thing is that civil servants/officials are bribed. At usually on the cheap too, so it'll take a lot of digging to find it, and worse, prove it. While no doubt that brazen bribery occurs at all levels and in a large range of dollar amounts, I do not think this is such a serious problem that it requires the nuclear option he is employing. There is a bribery-adjacent phenomenon that is far worse. I don't know what to call it. Favor-trading? But there is no quid pro quo sufficient to prosecute in most cases, and any attempt to do so would look like (and probably actually become) a witch hunt. If a civil servant is just being extra cozy to some private entity knowing (but without anything that would amount to evidence) that they'll be able to sail into some nice lobbyist gig in 3 years, where is the bribe? It was never promised. It's not guaranteed (circumstances could well change before that becomes possible). How much is that shit costing us? And while I'm sure that some would call that bribery too, it's juvenile to do so and counter-productive.
• fumar 2y ago
  Which cloud provider is DOGE using?
• muaytimbo 2y ago
  giving DOGE sudo is a whole article?
• vezycash 2y ago
  My two cents. God-mode privilege already existed before DOGE, someone else had (or still has) this privilege. Priority - How to limit power of such privilege in future.
  • regularfry 2y ago
    Often what you'll find is that the power was limited through separation of privileges. One person would not be able to do much beyond a limited boundary. Sounds like that's no longer true.
    • vuln 2y ago
      “Often” false. I’d bet 60-70% of the Fortune 500 doesn’t fully adhere to these “best practices” maybe only the government when handling classified information comes close.
      • Capricorn2481 2y ago
        They're not talking about Fortune 500 companies, they're talking about the literal government and the rules for sharing information between agencies.
  • misiti3780 2y ago
    Yes, and the chances of that person being technically smarter than the DOGE is close to zero.
    • whymeogod 2y ago
      Well, yes, because 1 is pretty close to zero, on a scale of 0 to infinity. However, if you look at their actual technical skilz: The incompetence at DOGE is staggering. Absolutely no security on their .gov webiste: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43045835 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43045835 can't even get mail merges to work, see some of their emails terminating people. Telling people to sign the doc and then not attaching the doc. The search for 'probationary' employees failing 3 times because they didn't check the definition of the term. No, technical competence really isn't DOGE's strong point.
• 1970-01-01 2y ago
  What should happen, and nobody is talking about this, is the USA is severely downgraded in its overall credit rating due to an unhinged and ongoing "fire, aim, ready" self-audit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_credit-rating_downgrades https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_governme...
  • archon810 2y ago
    Nice username. I thought HN was broken for a second.
  • mempko 2y ago
    The deficit hawks don't understand how money works. Everything about DOGE and their mission has a fundamental deep misunderstanding of why governments with their own currency must have deficits. Literal accounting 101. Unfortunately Elon has an economics degree, which means he is completely uneducated in accounting.
    • rchaud 2y ago
      No need to infatilize their behavior by pointing to a lack of education. If he can head up several corporations, he can read a balance sheet. This is smash and grab politics, the things that happen in places like post-USSR when there's a power vaccuum, everything is up for grabs, the courts are powerless and territories start getting carved up by a coterie of connected technocrats. How long was it before Yeltsin's uneasy alliance with oligarchs crumbled, paving the way for a ruler who wasn't going to make the same mistakes?
    • TeaBrain 2y ago
      It doesn't appear that DOGE is handling the problem with the appropriate amount of care or analysis, but the US does have a deficit problem. The issue is not simply that the US has a deficit, nor have I heard anyone argue this point, but that the deficit to GDP ratio is around twice as large as the historical average, and is projected to continue to increase.
    • JumpCrisscross 2y ago
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  A huge problem with this is that from all accounts, these engineers going in don't seem to have any accountability. No one knows who is in charge and making the decisions (presumably Musk though official statements say he's not the DOGE administrator, but no one knows who is), they come into offices like an FBI raid demanding access but won't give reasons, say who is in charge, what they are doing, or even their names.[0] Its much worse than an FBI raid, and reminiscent of Gestapo tactics. So even if DOGE is benign (and I don't think they are, but lets assume for a moment), if something goes wrong, who is to blame? Where is the transparency they are expecting of government agencies? Would you trust an outside team like that, say some brash McKinsley team of "experts", to come in and do whatever they want with your systems? What company would allow that? Also turns out that they're making up shit. $8 billion "saved" was actually $8 million because they didn't do their homework. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/doge-musk-federal-agencies-takeover/681744/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/doge-mu...
  • whymeogod 2y ago
    > official statements say he's (Musk) not the DOGE administrator, but no one knows who is That's because they believe in maximum transparency.
    • insane_dreamer 2y ago
      s/max/min/g
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Another very negative long-term effect of all of this is how is the government going to recruit talent in the future? How many people, who have good prospects elsewhere, are going to work for a government agency -- usually a lower pay -- to put up with shit like this that doesn't even happen in industry? Would you? Sure there are sometimes mass layoffs that are handled pretty badly in industry, but not these Gestapo-like purge tactics that are clearly designed that way to instill fear and loyalty.
  • a_ba 2y ago
    Why have a functional government if instead you and your buddies can you benefit from contracting out?
  • derektank 2y ago
    We've needed reforms to civil service and the general schedule pay scale specifically for a long time now. One can hope that a future Congress could write a bill that resets government hiring and compensation practices in the wake of this administration, but perhaps that's a fantasy at this point.
    • Kapura 2y ago
      it's cute you think congress is in control right now.
      • tome 2y ago
        Cheap snarky comments like this have no place on HN.
  • skizm 2y ago
    I think that is part of the point. "As hire As. Bs hire Cs." A-tier folks want to work with the best, B-tier folks want to work with lackeys that will do their bidding. It's pretty clear there's no A-tier folks in charge at the moment.
    • 2y ago
• giarc 2y ago
  Putting aside the whole idea that Elon "bought" his way into this position, it's crazy this is the path that Trump is taking. He has a house and a senate that would likely happily cut all these programs, and it could be done legally and without all this mess. Why let Elon run roughshod over the government?
  • WesleyJohnson 2y ago
    It's in the Project 2025 playbook. They're trying to overwhelm everyone so you can't possible keep track of all they're doing. Store security could handle one shoplifter at a time; but when you have a riot and mass looting - you have fewer options and often just step aside and let them loot. Then deal with the mess later. Also - he's a narcissist and he wants all the credit. Also - he's a wannabe dictator, and on his way to making it a reality, so he's demonstrating that he does not need permission or help.
    • theultdev 2y ago
      Not related to Project 2025, and they have countless times said they aren't associated with that project. But yes, "Flood the Zone" is the strategy to combat Democrat's media and court strategies. It was started by Steve Bannon in 2018, but expanded massively under Stephen Miller. The rest of your post is just hysteria so I won't comment on that.
      • ncr100 2y ago
        No. The current GOP administration, starting from before this election: - supported funding Project 2025's development by GOP members - talked about Project 2025 favorably - saw Project 2025 demonized by the media - THEN denied they support Project 2025 - got elected using Project 2025 tactics - hired Project 2025 author INTO this new administration - are currently implementing Project 2025 policies. SO "THEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT 2025" seems closer to "true" and "fact" than unlikely.
        • theultdev 2y ago
• akomtu 2y ago
  DOGE = EGOD = EGO/GOD
  • jag-ermeister 2y ago
    len("EGO") == len("GOD") == 3 Half Life 3 confirmed.
• JohnMakin 2y ago
  This reminds me of that scene in Don't Look Up where the planet puts all of their hopes in an eclectic oligarch's dumb plan to blow up the asteroid about to obliterate the planet, and it fails miserably. There is no chance any of this bodes well for many people not directly standing to profit directly from this pillaging of the federal government, and I'm not sure there is a way to recover from whatever is being done here. GG, I guess.
• hnthrowaway0315 2y ago
  I hope they at least open the original documents to the American public, instead of posting on X. IMHO the public should have the rights to review and grill the officials about the spending.
  • ncr100 2y ago
    I hope they stop what they are doing. I hope they follow the law.
    • hnthrowaway0315 2y ago
      Whenever I see "follow the law", my first reaction is always: Is the law fair and just? I'm merely posing the question. If you find the law to be fair and just, then for sure everyone should and probably will follow the law.
• y1426i 2y ago
  The comments here seem mostly against DOGE, but I have seen the waste in these organizations firsthand, and we all pay for it. Musk hopes to cut spending by 10%, but that is only because he is limited in what he can do. A Twitter-style cleanup would at least reduce it by 50%, but it is not feasible. Know that those 10% or 50% directly map to a percentage of your income and lifestyle directly (higher taxes) or indirectly (higher inflation).
  • hiddencost 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • y1426i 2y ago
      I worked for years helping procure government grants and saw how it was used. People who have lived in just one place (aka. California) and have nothing to compare don't realize the amount of waste happening here. The cities that collect the highest taxes have the infrastructure and facilities of a poor town. The prop monies go down the drain or are grossly misspent all the time. DOGE is necessary and needs this level of access and authority to make this scale of change in such a short time.
• rad_gruchalski 2y ago
  It will all land in Moscow. Or Beijing. Have fun.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    China already had full access (and extracted) all treasury information in a recent cyber attack. Look it up
    • rad_gruchalski 2y ago
      I’m not interested. I don’t care, I’m on a different continent and we will soon have other problems.
• misiti3780 2y ago
  This is great news for anyone paying taxes in the US. People really underestimate how incompetent the federal work force really is. Not everyone of course. But I contracted with the DOD for six years and you legit could have fired half the federal employees. They didnt do shit all day and it sounds like it's gotten way worse since COVID allowed these people to work from home. I seriously want a real, non-politically based argument on why we shouldnt be trying to 1. find fraud 2. fire 10-20% of these people immediately Imagine what we can do in 2025 by applying LLM search to all of the federal paperwork!
• andy_ppp 2y ago
  If you think this data won’t be used to disenfranchise and target democratic voters and give the GOP perpetual rule, I have a bridge to sell you. “Oh no! Big mistake we cancelled hundreds of thousands of people from voting just before the election! It just happens to be 99.9% Democrats in swing states who all happen to be marked as dead in all government systems!” It will be similar to Cambridge Analytica - with all the US Government’s data on one side, this is a massive advantage for targeting even without direct cheating.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    illegal aliens, and the NGOs who have been bringing them in and supporting them, that the democrats brought in as future voters so they would have complete control, Well, no more funding for them! At least, not from America! It's no secret that these NGOs are now trying to attach themselves to Brussels to continue ops in the US, leeches will be leeches
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • cryptonector 2y ago
    The States operate their voter registration rolls, not the president.
    • andy_ppp 2y ago
      This doesn’t prevent every single person in the US (almost anyway) from being profiled and having ads and propaganda targeted against them.
• the_optimist 2y ago
  This should be very illegal. It’s a huge security risk to let Federal government employees access Federal government systems.
  • whymeogod 2y ago
    You forgot to add "without proper security controls/clearances and data governance".
    • the_optimist 2y ago
      I didn’t. It’s just a giant security scam to let doge access systems. Didn’t you read the article? The USAID people said they don’t trust the doge people so we shouldn’t either.
• gsibble 2y ago
  Slanted political article. Flagged.
  • imperial_march 2y ago
    Yeah, they really aren't happy the corruption is being unearthed, this is above and beyond anything they were planning. Hell, there should have been massive riots by the left now, though the funding has now disappeared for the professional organisers and rent a crowd. Democrats are 20 mil in debt from the election, and now their money funnels have been closed down. They simply weren't expecting this.
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Trump/Musk are using "corruption/fraud" as a lie to remake the government in their image (or Project2025's image), in the same way that Bush used WMDs as a lie to invade Iraq. Where's the evidence of widespread corruption? If there really was corruption and fraud, then we'd be hearing of people being investigated and/or charged with breaking the law, not randomly fired or fired for ideological/loyalty/retribution reasons.
• stiltzkin 2y ago
  [dead]
• kra34 2y ago
  I think over half of this article is wildly speculative hyperbole. "Here is a list of things we can imagine that DOGE might do with this data: 1. Invent super solider zombies. 2. Blackmail you (you specifically are at risk here) 3. Sell all the data to China who will work with Israel and Mexico to conquer America You should be extremely worried! Run in Fear of what might come to pass!" because some guy filled out a request to have admin access to some government data stores. Ridiculous. Between United, BCBS, and existing Chinese infiltrations into OPM and telcos your data is already compromised by real / confirmed bad actors. This is disappointing click bait from the Atlantic and their editors should be ashamed of its publication.
• Zamaamiro 2y ago
  People did not vote to give Elon Musk absolute, unaccountable access to the most sensitive machineries of government. They've fired and hobbled all of the inspectors general and parties that are supposed to monitor and hold them accountable. This is nothing short of a security nightmare and insider threat of the highest degree.
• buckle8017 2y ago
  They're only listed source is an employee of USAID. I have no reason to believe anything in this article.
• unsupp0rted 2y ago
  Is this more access than 19-year-old summer interns in the various agencies get (to their given agency)? Because it's not a foregone conclusion that it is. At least not based on "according to an employee in senior leadership at USAID".
• astroid 2y ago
  The last time this topic came up, I manually and then with AI analyzed 13 articles talking about 'read/write' access - and all of it was 2nd or 3rd party info from anonymous sources. Reading this article it appears on the surface to be a little more conclusive... but once you peel back ther layers, we are back to square one. There are many red flags still that make me question the reliability of this: the senior USAID source said. “What do you do with this information? I had to ask myself, Do I file my taxes this year or not? I had to sit and debate that.” Ok this is kind of silly - assuming they are being fully honest and forthright, then their account information would already be 'compromised' unless they change banks yearly which seems.. unlikely. So why wasn't their question "Should I close the account I used for tax refunds in the past? Should I try to create an insulated account instead" -- rather instead, they subtly implant the idea that maybe they should do something illegal in response to this supposed breach. (not file taxes, like them or not - not interested in sovereign citizen arguments btw). So this right out of the gate feels like FUD by virtue of that alone... and if you are cynical enough you could probably argue this is propaganda meant to cause well-meaning citizens to break the law out of fear, which is deplorable. "Over the past few days, we’ve talked with civil servants working for numerous agencies, all of whom requested anonymity because they fear what will happen if they lose their job—not just to themselves, but to the functioning of the federal government." Ok so it's all anonymous sources again - everyone is up in arms and there isn't even clarity in this article if the anonymous sources are first party, second party, third party, or what. Previous FUD campaigns at least made that clear, but I'll try to pick this one apart as well. Additionaly, they are implying that somehow not being anonymous may jeopardize the entire functioning of the federal govt... excuse me, what?? I did the same AI analysis using CoPilot as I did on previous articles, and this is what it came up with breaking down the 'sources': Anonymous Source: Type: Anonymous Details: The article cites an anonymous source described as a “civil servants” who provides insights into the Doge God Mode Access incident. NOTE (from me not CoPilot): This is entirely irrelevant, they are presenting a 'nightmare' situation a security researcher and asking their opinion of it. This does not mean the scenario is happening, and does not support the thesis. Hypothetical Scenarios: Type: Hypothetical Details: The article includes hypothetical scenarios, such as the one about NASA’s thermal-protection or encryption technologies, to illustrate potential risks and vulnerabilities. NOTE (from me not CoPilot): I think we can all agree hypotheticals are pointless if you haven't reliably established baseline 'facts' the support the hypothetical - so far there is a running trend, as it's all based on hypothetical fear mongering That's it - that's the meat of this article. The articles is also riddles with other clues that this is a slanted report like: "One experienced government information-security contractor offered a blunt response to the God-mode situation at USAID: “That sounds like our worst fears come true.”" -- ok but he clearly has no knowledge, so describing a worst fear and then going 'omg that soudds bad' is pointless.. People really need to step up their media literacy skills if they want to get through the next four years without having an aneurhysim -- and this to me just says that the work DOGE is doing is probably threatening the pocket books of many 'important people'. Hey speaking of important people, who funds The Atlantic anyway...
• Dowwie 2y ago
  The goal is to reduce government spending by $2 Trillion in 4 years. If you want to see how this is going: https://polymarket.com/doge https://polymarket.com/doge
  • nmz 2y ago
    That's not the goal at all. And that's not how its going. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/19/nx-s1-5302705/doge-overstates-savings-federal-contracts https://www.npr.org/2025/02/19/nx-s1-5302705/doge-overstates...
    • hector126 2y ago
      > Of the DOGE list's initial claim of $16 billion in savings, half came from an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) listing that was entered into the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) in 2022 with a whopping $8 billion maximum possible value. > According to a DOGE post on X, that number was a typo that was corrected in the contract database to $8 million on Jan. 22 of this year before being terminated a week later, and DOGE "has always used the correct $8M in its calculations." Jeez, that's pretty damning.
  • fermentation 2y ago
    This linked website has an incentive to portray this "savings" as larger than it actually is.
• isthisfoss 2y ago
  Why is this a bad thing if their job is to audit budget and spending? The article also does not go into technical details on what this supposed god mode actually is.
  • jb3689 2y ago
    That's the issue right? No one knows what access they have, so you should assume the worst. They've already been claiming that they are making writes, so full write privilege isn't off the table. It's not even the access that's the issue though, it's the lack of oversight. If I login to a Prod database, my commands are logged which allow the team to go back and figure out what happened if something didn't go as expected. We have backups and response processes to deal with "oops" situations. I strongly doubt the DOGE team has any fallback plan, and it would be irresponsible to simply assume they've thought fallback through. This is more troubling with the systems being tricky legacy systems. You might have the best intentions, but it is really easy to make mistakes in brittle systems even if you are careful. We've already seen evidence that the team may have no idea how to interpret the data they're seeing. It'd be reckless to start making edits while only having a partial understanding of the system. The story from DOGE is "look at all this fraud we've found, we're going to fix it now". It's not "here's a bunch of things we want to investigate further". It's not "here's how we're going to test whether this is actually fraud". It's not "here's what we're going to try and how we're going to revert if we are wrong".
  • anon25783 2y ago
    The DOGE is mainly staffed by former employees of Elon Musk's companies, many of them being in their early twenties and one being 19 years old [1]. The presence of so many Musk associates is a conflict of interest: supposing "god mode" means that DOGE has unfiltered access to the private data of US citizens, there's not much stopping Elon Musk from exploiting that data for personal gain. And besides, would you want your private data to be in the hands of so many very young people who have little prior experience in anything? [1] - https://www.newsweek.com/doge-list-staff-revealed-2029965 https://www.newsweek.com/doge-list-staff-revealed-2029965
  • bongodongobob 2y ago
• tintor 2y ago
  DOGE administrator is ... Grok.
• tiffanyh 2y ago
  > ‘GOD MODE’ ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATA Isn't this title clickbait? There's an implication this is access to all government data - but the article doesn't explicitly state that but would lead you to believe that. Given that I highly doubt all government data is in a single data store ... this is probably more like - GOGE has access to all GSA contracts (just one department) ... which is way less sensationalized (and appropriate for a government agency looking review contracts for efficiency) Note: I'm not taking a political stance on this.
  • crooked-v 2y ago
    They have full admin access to all USAID systems (which, let's be real, also includes some US intelligence service cover material, since USAID has long been used for that), and are actively seeking full admin access to the systems for every other federal department.
    • cryptonector 2y ago
      They do, however, have the clearance for that level of access, and the delegated authority. In that sense this is much ado about nothing, or just a complaint about the politics, which, ok, sure, HN loves to do right now.
      • nmz 2y ago
        Access != Modification
• zackmorris 2y ago
  The difference between DOGE and previous overreaches of power like the Department of Homeland Security is the attack on the truth. What do I mean by that? Well, during the previous political era (loosely 9/11 through the COVID-19 pandemic), when intellectuals spoke truth to power, power listened. So people like us could voice our opinions on constitutionality, historical precedent, etc, and eventually our points made their way up through the news cycle and someone in a position of power would validate our concerns. Whereas today, people like Elon Musk belittle academic arguments as nonconstructive because they haven't made us money and we aren't rich. So obviously we're wrong. This wasn't always the case. Some billionaires could be very stubborn, but at their core, they still held themselves to a higher standard, a geek ethos. It mattered what academics thought. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I side with Bill Gates on this. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/27/bill-gates-elon-musk-far-right https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/27/bill-gates-e...
• cryptonector 2y ago
  > “We’re operating believing our systems are completely bugged,” one person told us. Doesn't everyone at work, any $WORK, do this? I do! I even type my thoughts "aloud" so to speak in order to help anyone viewing my sessions on replay.
• ConspiracyFact 2y ago
  > No good reason or case can be made for one person or entity to have this scope of access to this many government agencies containing this much sensitive information. The president should obviously have this level of access.
• esilverman 2y ago
  this is not good
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• Chinwe888 2y ago
  [dead]
• TrapLord_Rhodo 2y ago
  The reality is that just because something has been “known for decades” doesn’t mean it has been addressed—especially in government bureaucracies, where inefficiency, inertia, and misaligned incentives often prevent meaningful reform. The persistence of outdated Social Security records, massive waste, and fraud is a perfect example of systemic dysfunction. The president, as the chief executive, has broad authority to ensure that executive agencies function efficiently and effectively. While there are statutory and congressional constraints, the executive branch is ultimately responsible for implementing policies and running departments. If existing bureaucrats and Treasury officials have had access to this data for years but failed to act, then it is not only within the president’s prerogative but arguably his duty to bring in outside expertise—whether that be Musk or anyone else—to tackle waste and inefficiency.
• TrapLord_Rhodo 2y ago
  I used to know Thomas during my first internship at Tesla. He's incredibly talented and a very kind, thoughtful guy. Keep up the goodwork Thomas, and ignore all these haters!
• merillecuz56 2y ago
  [dead]
• ramnauth 2y ago
  The list of the frode and abuse