7 ms·

>The stop in sharing data was “due to funding constraints that have caused the Department to turn off the underlying network” read the statement, which added th

>The stop in sharing data was “due to funding constraints that have caused the Department to turn off the underlying network” read the statement, which added that embassies and consulates were directed to keep their monitors running and the sharing of data could resume in the future if funded was restored. Hmm... >The Washington Monument syndrome,[0] also known as the Mount Rushmore syndrome or the firemen first principle, is a term used to describe the phenomenon of government agencies in the United States cutting the most visible or appreciated service provided by the government when faced with budget cuts. It has been used in reference to cuts in popular services such as national parks and libraries or to valued public employees such as teachers and firefighters, with the Washington Monument and Mount Rushmore being two of the most visible landmarks maintained by the National Park Service. This is done to put pressure on the public and lawmakers to rescind budget cuts. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Monument_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Monument_syndrome

epistasis 2y ago
I don't think your link is comparable. Air quality data is not a high profile valued thing. But it does sound "woke" and outside of what an incompetent know-nothing would say that the State Department shouldn't touch. The "funding constraint" is almost certainly trying to rid embassies of the wokeness of monitoring pollution.
- adamiscool8 2y ago
  >Air quality data is not a high profile valued thing. Disagree completely - saying "we had to turn off the air quality data network" is vague enough to be plausibly blamed on budget cuts for a non-tech-savvy audience, while still having a significant enough impact to attract coverage from outlets like the NYT. This, in turn, creates another "pro-science" talking point to rally "The Resistance".
  - epistasis 2y ago
    Maybe to you, but not to any of the Trump voters I know. And not to a lot of other people, either. This is in the State Department, not EPA, and embassies spending resources on pollution monitoring sounds like the very epitome of government waste that DOGE is trying to eliminate. It is not a "pro-science" talking point it is actually a real pro-science without the quotation marks talking point. Science has been completely under attack for every second this administration has been in power, in every single way, from funding to scientific indpendence to censoring of words that are politically incorrect to the Trump administration. Suggesting that this is an optional high profile shut down of science rather than something completely in line with what's happening every single day is a very odd take on the matter. And as to the proof that this is not something that people really care about in a high profile way, the science rallies get about 1/10th the support of other sorts of rallies in those trying to resist Trump's changes.
    - adamiscool8 2y ago
      Those most passionate about capital-S Science are often aggressively anti-Trump, making them prone to accepting reports like this uncritically. If the State Department spends a crazy sum maintaining the air quality app, questioning that expense is fair and pretending otherwise only undermines scientific credibility. This article is a "pro-science" talking point because it admits embassies were told to keep monitors running and data sharing could resume if funding returned. So at this point, there's not even necessarily a gap in the actual data. The only proof this shutdown was unavoidable comes from those who carried it out. Funny how that goes...
      - chipotle_coyote 2y ago
        Do you have a source that suggests the State Department spends a crazy sum maintaining the air quality app, or are you Just Asking Questions™? I mean, I've found those most passionate about capital-T Trump are often aggressively anti-science, making them prone to accepting transparently petty bullshit uncritically. Not that I'm saying you're doing that, of course. Although it is weird you use the phrase "pro-science talking point" as if being pro-science was a bad thing. Do you think it's a bad thing? Just asking questions.
  - lurk2 2y ago
    The people relying on this data aren't even American constituents.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      But it cost us at least $15,000,000, right? It's this "this is cheap compared to the value it provides" has analogs in coupon clipping shopaholics: "you don't understand, it was 50% off!" Right, but it still cost money, a significant amount. I could live forever on $15mm, and help so many people off just dividends and yeild. $15mm is a lot of money.
      - tayo42 2y ago
        People really struggle with big numbers. 15 million for the government isn't a lot of money. and even for most big businesses it isn't a lot of money. The government spends trillions every year. 15 million divided by the ~150million taxpayers in the US is ten cents per person. Do you pick up dimes off the street?
        genewitch 2y ago
        $79.1 billion over 10 years was "wasted" as fraud and other "should not have paid", according to the Social Security administration. That's 5,273 people like me getting $15,000,000. > It's this "this is cheap compared to the value it provides" has analogs in coupon clipping shopaholics: "you don't understand, it was 50% off!" Right, but it still cost money, a significant amount. this is the main thrust. Sure, it's like a dime to the government. have you ever heard the phrase "nickel and dimed"? How many "$15 million dollar" nickels do you need to stack before it becomes a culture problem in the federal government? It's thinking like you espoused in that last sentence that lead to waste and fraud. "it's like a dime compared to our budget, what's the big deal?" there's a lot of dimes.
        apical_dendrite 2y ago
        Social security pays out $1.5 trillion a year. If only $8 billion a year is lost to fraud, that means fraud is 0.5%. It's impossible to design a system with zero fraud, but keeping it under 0.5% is very impressive.
  - chasd00 2y ago
    Yeah what does “air quality data network” even mean? Do they have dedicated circuits between all the consulates and then some pop somewhere all for air quality sensors? If so, then it deserves to be shutdown because that would be grossly over engineered for the task. Imagine, an entire dedicated network and all the gear and lease expense that comes with it to read some sensors from a rest api.
    - defrost 2y ago
      > Do they have dedicated circuits between all the consulates Yes .. multiple parallel and redundant dedicated highly secure encrypted clean room communications between embassies and home with the bandwith for multiple high res video data, satellite feeds etc. > because that would be grossly over engineered for the task. You think US embassy networks are grossly over engineered to be resistant to Chinese, Russian, North Korean, Iranian, Isreali, spy networks? Over engineered? .. there are museums dedicated to sneaky arse spy gear, eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) > Imagine, an entire dedicated network and all the gear and lease expense ... and yet being unable to handle the tiny addition load of some once per minute analog sensor data? In real terms the air quality network costs ride for free on what already exists.
      - chasd00 2y ago
        I think a dedicated, secure blah blah network for air quality sensor data is indeed over engineered. If it rides for free in the existing infrastructure then how can it be shutdown? Or are the being dramatic as OP said and really they just turned off the api.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        defrost 2y ago
        I would guess (albeit a guess based on decades of real life experience across several countries) that the instruments are still on the roof (it costs money to remove them) the data and instrument routines are being kept up by a DoD adjacent SIGINT team that look after a forest of antenna, instruments, rack mount IT gear etc, and the data is still going back home to the US. The literal at embassy upkeep costs for these atmospheric instruments is zero given it's minor work piggybacking on required existing staffed infrastucture that's not going away. What's probably been cut is the "making it public" part that has a third party contractor take pooled embassy data and put it up on a website for all the world to see. That needn't be expensive .. but it's been cut all the same. Of course the US still runs embassy instruments, esp. in 'hostile' locations - seismic to detect tunneling, air quality to detect gassing, radiometric for nuclear hazards, network sanity and canary services to trip digital intrusion, etc. None of that is going away. > I think a dedicated, secure blah blah network for air quality sensor data is indeed over engineered. I'm sorry, are you on HN but don't actually have any IT experience? The dedicated secure high bandwidth network is for the embassy .. a literal US outpost in a foreign potentially hostile land. It's for secure comms, SCIF to SCIF comms, diplomatic communications, backup for military | intelligence usage. Air quality and other met data is a trivial low bandwidth data load that could transmit in full on a shitty low baud POTS phone .. there's no issue having an embassy SIGINT officer set and forget a pipe on the existing network infrastructure, their time is paid for, the equipment is there.
- LightHugger 2y ago
  I don't know but it might be the highest profile thing that specific department can muster.
- bandrami 2y ago
  It's definitely high profile in India and China. Delhi air quality was one problem that Modi originally ran on when he first became PM.
jordanb 2y ago
Would make sense if it was the executive trying to get more money allocated out of Congress. In this case, the money is allocated but the executive is choosing not to spend it "for government efficiency."
- adamiscool8 2y ago
  Do you have a source for this? The article on says it's "due to funding constraints that have caused the Department to turn off the underlying network" but does not elaborate on the constraints. Given embassies clearly have latitude in funding their continued operations, I find it implausible the executive halted "air quality monitoring" and much more likely a disgruntled bureaucrat made a choice.
  - jordanb 2y ago
    Well, Congress hasn't passed a budget and the department is still working on previous year's budget. So either that money somehow ran out unexpectedly, or it's the work of Elon, Big Balls, and the gang.
    - adamiscool8 2y ago
      Or, the not-so-secret third option, a disgruntled State Dept bureaucrat made a choice.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > the not-so-secret third option, a disgruntled State Dept bureaucrat made a choice If this happened in isolation, sure. We’re also firing random weapons stockpile experts, bird flu, customs agents (while raising tariffs? Bailout for smugglers?), IRS agents (while trying to cut fraud, mind you) and forest servicers (after record wildfires). Against that backdrop, chaotic shutdown has ample explanatory value. You need a lot of ketamine to see the patterns in this madness. Instead, let’s take it at face value: these are illegal acts of random mendaciousness designed to demoralise federal workers before the courts cut Musk off. Musk, not Trump, is taking the lead because he can weather a lot more heat and Trump’s main deliverable to Thiel and Andreessen is his tax cut.
IshKebab 2y ago
What underlying network are they not funding anyway? Did they turn off the internet? Difficult to see how they are saving any money by turning off something they've already bought that has essentially zero running costs. Something doesn't add up for sure.
sinuhe69 2y ago
As I understand it, let these monitors run and share their data cost nothings. Every private person can do it. It’s just needs an Internet connection.
refurb 2y ago
This occurred to me too. What costs are involved? Once set up the costs should be “an internet connection”. I assume the embassy didn’t have their internet cut off. Sure it may require costs over time, but it reeks of “ill show them”.
- epistasis 2y ago
  Many if not most of the spending restrictions are about pushing politics. If the financial restrictions are "cut everything non-essential" then this sort of makes sense. If the cuts are "this is woke science stop that" then it makes 100% sense. Either way, blaming the State Department for this is neither reasonable nor prudent.
  - refurb 2y ago
    But if it’s purely a spending cut there is no reason why the monitors can’t stay up - the costs are $0.
apical_dendrite 2y ago
I don't think you understand just how chaotic DOGE is. They are cancelling huge blocks of contracts at a time without understanding what these contracts actually do. Then when they break something really critical, maybe they bring a few of the contracts back, but they still leave the system in a crippled state. For instance, at the VA health system, they've canceled contracts for radiation safety, sterilization of equipment, and certifications that are required to run a hospital. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-contracts-may-harm-veterans-care-employees-say-rcna191448 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-cont... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-contracts-may-harm-veterans-care-employees-say-rcna191448 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-cont...

epistasis 2y ago

I don't think your link is comparable. Air quality data is not a high profile valued thing. But it does sound "woke" and outside of what an incompetent know-nothing would say that the State Department shouldn't touch. The "funding constraint" is almost certainly trying to rid embassies of the wokeness of monitoring pollution.

adamiscool8 2y ago
>Air quality data is not a high profile valued thing. Disagree completely - saying "we had to turn off the air quality data network" is vague enough to be plausibly blamed on budget cuts for a non-tech-savvy audience, while still having a significant enough impact to attract coverage from outlets like the NYT. This, in turn, creates another "pro-science" talking point to rally "The Resistance".
- epistasis 2y ago
  Maybe to you, but not to any of the Trump voters I know. And not to a lot of other people, either. This is in the State Department, not EPA, and embassies spending resources on pollution monitoring sounds like the very epitome of government waste that DOGE is trying to eliminate. It is not a "pro-science" talking point it is actually a real pro-science without the quotation marks talking point. Science has been completely under attack for every second this administration has been in power, in every single way, from funding to scientific indpendence to censoring of words that are politically incorrect to the Trump administration. Suggesting that this is an optional high profile shut down of science rather than something completely in line with what's happening every single day is a very odd take on the matter. And as to the proof that this is not something that people really care about in a high profile way, the science rallies get about 1/10th the support of other sorts of rallies in those trying to resist Trump's changes.
  - adamiscool8 2y ago
    Those most passionate about capital-S Science are often aggressively anti-Trump, making them prone to accepting reports like this uncritically. If the State Department spends a crazy sum maintaining the air quality app, questioning that expense is fair and pretending otherwise only undermines scientific credibility. This article is a "pro-science" talking point because it admits embassies were told to keep monitors running and data sharing could resume if funding returned. So at this point, there's not even necessarily a gap in the actual data. The only proof this shutdown was unavoidable comes from those who carried it out. Funny how that goes...
    - chipotle_coyote 2y ago
      Do you have a source that suggests the State Department spends a crazy sum maintaining the air quality app, or are you Just Asking Questions™? I mean, I've found those most passionate about capital-T Trump are often aggressively anti-science, making them prone to accepting transparently petty bullshit uncritically. Not that I'm saying you're doing that, of course. Although it is weird you use the phrase "pro-science talking point" as if being pro-science was a bad thing. Do you think it's a bad thing? Just asking questions.
- lurk2 2y ago
  The people relying on this data aren't even American constituents.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    But it cost us at least $15,000,000, right? It's this "this is cheap compared to the value it provides" has analogs in coupon clipping shopaholics: "you don't understand, it was 50% off!" Right, but it still cost money, a significant amount. I could live forever on $15mm, and help so many people off just dividends and yeild. $15mm is a lot of money.
    - tayo42 2y ago
      People really struggle with big numbers. 15 million for the government isn't a lot of money. and even for most big businesses it isn't a lot of money. The government spends trillions every year. 15 million divided by the ~150million taxpayers in the US is ten cents per person. Do you pick up dimes off the street?
      - genewitch 2y ago
        $79.1 billion over 10 years was "wasted" as fraud and other "should not have paid", according to the Social Security administration. That's 5,273 people like me getting $15,000,000. > It's this "this is cheap compared to the value it provides" has analogs in coupon clipping shopaholics: "you don't understand, it was 50% off!" Right, but it still cost money, a significant amount. this is the main thrust. Sure, it's like a dime to the government. have you ever heard the phrase "nickel and dimed"? How many "$15 million dollar" nickels do you need to stack before it becomes a culture problem in the federal government? It's thinking like you espoused in that last sentence that lead to waste and fraud. "it's like a dime compared to our budget, what's the big deal?" there's a lot of dimes.
        apical_dendrite 2y ago
        Social security pays out $1.5 trillion a year. If only $8 billion a year is lost to fraud, that means fraud is 0.5%. It's impossible to design a system with zero fraud, but keeping it under 0.5% is very impressive.
- chasd00 2y ago
  Yeah what does “air quality data network” even mean? Do they have dedicated circuits between all the consulates and then some pop somewhere all for air quality sensors? If so, then it deserves to be shutdown because that would be grossly over engineered for the task. Imagine, an entire dedicated network and all the gear and lease expense that comes with it to read some sensors from a rest api.
  - defrost 2y ago
    > Do they have dedicated circuits between all the consulates Yes .. multiple parallel and redundant dedicated highly secure encrypted clean room communications between embassies and home with the bandwith for multiple high res video data, satellite feeds etc. > because that would be grossly over engineered for the task. You think US embassy networks are grossly over engineered to be resistant to Chinese, Russian, North Korean, Iranian, Isreali, spy networks? Over engineered? .. there are museums dedicated to sneaky arse spy gear, eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) > Imagine, an entire dedicated network and all the gear and lease expense ... and yet being unable to handle the tiny addition load of some once per minute analog sensor data? In real terms the air quality network costs ride for free on what already exists.
    - chasd00 2y ago
      I think a dedicated, secure blah blah network for air quality sensor data is indeed over engineered. If it rides for free in the existing infrastructure then how can it be shutdown? Or are the being dramatic as OP said and really they just turned off the api.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - defrost 2y ago
        I would guess (albeit a guess based on decades of real life experience across several countries) that the instruments are still on the roof (it costs money to remove them) the data and instrument routines are being kept up by a DoD adjacent SIGINT team that look after a forest of antenna, instruments, rack mount IT gear etc, and the data is still going back home to the US. The literal at embassy upkeep costs for these atmospheric instruments is zero given it's minor work piggybacking on required existing staffed infrastucture that's not going away. What's probably been cut is the "making it public" part that has a third party contractor take pooled embassy data and put it up on a website for all the world to see. That needn't be expensive .. but it's been cut all the same. Of course the US still runs embassy instruments, esp. in 'hostile' locations - seismic to detect tunneling, air quality to detect gassing, radiometric for nuclear hazards, network sanity and canary services to trip digital intrusion, etc. None of that is going away. > I think a dedicated, secure blah blah network for air quality sensor data is indeed over engineered. I'm sorry, are you on HN but don't actually have any IT experience? The dedicated secure high bandwidth network is for the embassy .. a literal US outpost in a foreign potentially hostile land. It's for secure comms, SCIF to SCIF comms, diplomatic communications, backup for military | intelligence usage. Air quality and other met data is a trivial low bandwidth data load that could transmit in full on a shitty low baud POTS phone .. there's no issue having an embassy SIGINT officer set and forget a pipe on the existing network infrastructure, their time is paid for, the equipment is there.
LightHugger 2y ago
I don't know but it might be the highest profile thing that specific department can muster.
bandrami 2y ago
It's definitely high profile in India and China. Delhi air quality was one problem that Modi originally ran on when he first became PM.

jordanb 2y ago

Would make sense if it was the executive trying to get more money allocated out of Congress. In this case, the money is allocated but the executive is choosing not to spend it "for government efficiency."

adamiscool8 2y ago
Do you have a source for this? The article on says it's "due to funding constraints that have caused the Department to turn off the underlying network" but does not elaborate on the constraints. Given embassies clearly have latitude in funding their continued operations, I find it implausible the executive halted "air quality monitoring" and much more likely a disgruntled bureaucrat made a choice.
- jordanb 2y ago
  Well, Congress hasn't passed a budget and the department is still working on previous year's budget. So either that money somehow ran out unexpectedly, or it's the work of Elon, Big Balls, and the gang.
  - adamiscool8 2y ago
    Or, the not-so-secret third option, a disgruntled State Dept bureaucrat made a choice.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > the not-so-secret third option, a disgruntled State Dept bureaucrat made a choice If this happened in isolation, sure. We’re also firing random weapons stockpile experts, bird flu, customs agents (while raising tariffs? Bailout for smugglers?), IRS agents (while trying to cut fraud, mind you) and forest servicers (after record wildfires). Against that backdrop, chaotic shutdown has ample explanatory value. You need a lot of ketamine to see the patterns in this madness. Instead, let’s take it at face value: these are illegal acts of random mendaciousness designed to demoralise federal workers before the courts cut Musk off. Musk, not Trump, is taking the lead because he can weather a lot more heat and Trump’s main deliverable to Thiel and Andreessen is his tax cut.

IshKebab 2y ago

What underlying network are they not funding anyway? Did they turn off the internet? Difficult to see how they are saving any money by turning off something they've already bought that has essentially zero running costs. Something doesn't add up for sure.

sinuhe69 2y ago

As I understand it, let these monitors run and share their data cost nothings. Every private person can do it. It’s just needs an Internet connection.

refurb 2y ago

This occurred to me too. What costs are involved? Once set up the costs should be “an internet connection”. I assume the embassy didn’t have their internet cut off. Sure it may require costs over time, but it reeks of “ill show them”.

epistasis 2y ago
Many if not most of the spending restrictions are about pushing politics. If the financial restrictions are "cut everything non-essential" then this sort of makes sense. If the cuts are "this is woke science stop that" then it makes 100% sense. Either way, blaming the State Department for this is neither reasonable nor prudent.
- refurb 2y ago
  But if it’s purely a spending cut there is no reason why the monitors can’t stay up - the costs are $0.

apical_dendrite 2y ago

I don't think you understand just how chaotic DOGE is. They are cancelling huge blocks of contracts at a time without understanding what these contracts actually do. Then when they break something really critical, maybe they bring a few of the contracts back, but they still leave the system in a crippled state. For instance, at the VA health system, they've canceled contracts for radiation safety, sterilization of equipment, and certifications that are required to run a hospital. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-contracts-may-harm-veterans-care-employees-say-rcna191448 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-cont... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-contracts-may-harm-veterans-care-employees-say-rcna191448 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/doge-plans-cut-va-cont...