4 ms·
I will go out on a (small) limb here and note that it really looks like the intention of this submission is is to associate a technical issue with DOGE and find
by geertj 2y ago
I will go out on a (small) limb here and note that it really looks like the intention of this submission is is to associate a technical issue with DOGE and find a friendly audience to further a point. Normally a DNS issue of a government site would not be news. Since the submission does not give any evidence or fact, it is lazy in that respect. And if indeed it had an unstated motive (my small limb), you could also say it’s disingenuous and brigading. Am I wrong? I would be happy to stand corrected.
- throawayonthe 2y ago[dead]
- raphman 2y agoI submitted this post and can guarantee that it was not my intention to associate this technical issue with DOGE. Quite the opposite: both in this thread and on Bluesky (where a lot of people blame DOGE for 'shutting down PubMed'), I have advocated for Hanlon's razor. My aim was to document that this was just a DNS problem, and to suggest a workaround to affected people. I actually find it a little bit sad that the DOGE angle is so prominent in this thread.
- geertj 2y agoThank you for clarifying!
- buyucu 2y agowell, it looks like Elon's teenage boys fired the wrong people :)