4 ms·

Should the government get a blank check? If there is waste and removing it won’t reduce efficacy, it should be purged.

CyrsBel 2y ago
You are both correct. It's not an either-or.
John23832 2y ago
> and removing it won’t reduce efficacy, it should be purged. This is the load-bearing idea that is made of toilet tissue. It will create inefficiency. In the best case because it's not how the decades of built up institutional knowledge knows how to get stuff done. If the worst (and most probable) case, because what you're removing is actually needed... and we'll get an "oops sorry" later when the damage is done.
- intended 2y ago
  >This is the load-bearing idea that is made of toilet tissue. Needed to save that line,
xorcist 2y ago
Be careful what you wish for, as the saying goes. I have seen so many times (in private organizations) clearly inefficient processes getting ripped out, only to be replaced with much more inefficient ones. Sometimes there are no shortcuts: You have to know what you're doing. The "This is 'something', therefore we must do it" bit only gets you so far.
daveguy 2y ago
Deeming things as waste within days of gaining access to the info is 100% in bad faith. There is no possible way that musk and his minions took the time to find out why anything is the way it is. Nevermind the fact that you don't have to shut anything down to perform an audit. He is going through with a bulldozer and saying "oops" when he destroys institutional knowledge and capabilities. The damage is the point.
basscomm 2y ago
Jumping into a complex system and trashing big swathes of it without taking the time to understand why it's there, what it does, and the consequences for destroying it will be, is one of the worst possible ways to 'reduce waste' that I can think of.
- ConspiracyFact 2y ago
  Does this same reasoning apply to social and cultural systems…?
EnergyAmy 2y ago
This is not how to accomplish that. Musk is looting the government for personal gain and installing lackeys that are loyal to him.

You are both correct. It's not an either-or.

> and removing it won’t reduce efficacy, it should be purged. This is the load-bearing idea that is made of toilet tissue. It will create inefficiency. In the best case because it's not how the decades of built up institutional knowledge knows how to get stuff done. If the worst (and most probable) case, because what you're removing is actually needed... and we'll get an "oops sorry" later when the damage is done.

intended 2y ago
>This is the load-bearing idea that is made of toilet tissue. Needed to save that line,

xorcist 2y ago

Be careful what you wish for, as the saying goes. I have seen so many times (in private organizations) clearly inefficient processes getting ripped out, only to be replaced with much more inefficient ones. Sometimes there are no shortcuts: You have to know what you're doing. The "This is 'something', therefore we must do it" bit only gets you so far.

daveguy 2y ago

Deeming things as waste within days of gaining access to the info is 100% in bad faith. There is no possible way that musk and his minions took the time to find out why anything is the way it is. Nevermind the fact that you don't have to shut anything down to perform an audit. He is going through with a bulldozer and saying "oops" when he destroys institutional knowledge and capabilities. The damage is the point.

basscomm 2y ago

Jumping into a complex system and trashing big swathes of it without taking the time to understand why it's there, what it does, and the consequences for destroying it will be, is one of the worst possible ways to 'reduce waste' that I can think of.

ConspiracyFact 2y ago
Does this same reasoning apply to social and cultural systems…?

EnergyAmy 2y ago

This is not how to accomplish that. Musk is looting the government for personal gain and installing lackeys that are loyal to him.