9 ms·

Doge Developed Error-Prone AI Tool to "Munch" Veterans Affairs Contracts

156 points by afavour 1y ago

bix6 1y ago
This is honestly unbelievable. Sahil wrote code he knew was bad and it was used to terminate vital medical contracts… how is that not fraud against every person who pays taxes?
- jaoane 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
    I think there's a difference between incompetently squandering government resources and intentionally tearing things apart. Sure, a lot of the time people in government are driving around while staring at their cell phone, but these Doge minions are intentionally driving on the sidewalk because they like hearing the sound of bodies hitting the windshield.
  - rsynnott 1y ago
    There's a difference between incompetence and recklessness; not all "oops, I did a stupid thing"s are equal.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
    This is a false equivalency, and it's the kind of false equivalency that is being used to excuse a tremendous amount of what the Trump administration is doing / has done.
footlose_3815 1y ago
"AI is the wrong tool to do this" someone said. Different things need to be addressed, like how someone is able to act outside all three branches of government, and have enough power to destroy the lives of those who protected our country when we needed them most. It should be crystal clear to even the most skeptical people should turn their opinion on how they bankrupt the poor and bail out the rich every single time.
rsynnott 1y ago
This whole thing is just kind of astonishing. > “I think that mistakes were made,” said Lavingia, who worked at DOGE for nearly two months. “I’m sure mistakes were made. Mistakes are always made. I would never recommend someone run my code and do what it says. It’s like that ‘Office’ episode where Steve Carell drives into the lake because Google Maps says drive into the lake. Do not drive into the lake.” Well, then why the hell did you write it? For purely entertainment purposes? I mean, what. EDIT: Oh, wow, just got to the prompt. Did he... did he just think LLMs were _magic_? "Level 1: Necessary consultants that can't be insourced" - how the hell is ChatGPT supposed to know what can and cannot be insourced? > In late March, Lavingia published a version of the “munchable” script on his GitHub account to invite others to use and improve it, he told ProPublica. “It would have been cool if the entire federal government used this script and anyone in the public could see that this is how the VA is thinking about cutting contracts.” No, that would not have been 'cool', you idiot. Bloody hell.
- John23832 1y ago
  ... and get paid to do it while sidelining anyone with actual experience in the sector/topic. I called this when it started. They would come in, be totally ineffective to the point of breaking things, and then we would get a "shucks, sorry" later.
  - rsynnott 1y ago
    I just can't believe how totally incompetent this whole thing is. Even for a Musk/Trump venture, I didn't expect quite this level of just complete nonsense.
    - nxobject 1y ago
      Imagine hiring a consultancy, and getting stuck with a team of people fresh out of college without any wisdom to guide them... I think that's what the American people got.
      - colejohnson66 1y ago
xnx 1y ago
This is all facilitated by congress and the president. Destruction under any pretense was the goal. They must all be voted out.
- glookler 1y ago
  Voted out? Crimes have been committed and the President as dictator nonsense has to be cancelled so these people can all go to federal prison where white collar criminals belong.
  - masfuerte 1y ago
    But there is no way that is happening while they remain in power.
    - dylan604 1y ago
      Even out of power, there's no way. SCOTUS said the prez is untouchable. The only hope is that a sweeping change in Congress happens with the mid-terms enough to be able to impeach and convict. But the likelihood of that can be summed up with "wish in one hand and shit in the other. see which fills up faster"
      - saubeidl 1y ago
        The second amendment was written to have a recourse in case of tyranny.
        dylan604 1y ago
        That's the nuclear option though. There should be plenty of more diplomatic ways before hit the big red button. Sadly, those options that we thought were there have been shown to only be a valid option if you have people with spine to stand up and utilize the options. Instead, we've seen where kowtowing has been the norm for so long that we seem to have lost our collective spine. Watching the Obama admin capitulate to the then speaker preventing his nominee from moving forward was abysmal. There was no valid reasoning for it, but it laid the ground work for why the bench looks like it does. There are plenty of other prior examples of the spines of the minority being brow beat to the point that not allowing POTUS to move his nominee forward was a collective should shrug
eviks 1y ago
Expected levels of YOLO incompetence, but still fascinating.
joshstrange 1y ago
> “I think that mistakes were made,” said Lavingia, who worked at DOGE for nearly two months. “I’m sure mistakes were made. Mistakes are always made. I would never recommend someone run my code and do what it says. It’s like that ‘Office’ episode where Steve Carell drives into the lake because Google Maps says drive into the lake. Do not drive into the lake.” Sahil Lavingia is a snake. I thought his blog post that was on HN a week or so ago displayed a frightening level of cognitive dissidence and now he wants to distance himself from it all. No way buddy, this will be a millstone hung around your neck. You encouraged this, you participated in this, you cheered this, you will live with the consequences.
- mvid 1y ago
  He will probably become a Thiel fellow or raise from YC
smackay 1y ago
I'd be very interested in learning more about how DOGE got staffed. If your goal was to dramatically cut government spending, then hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later would be the way to do it, otherwise you'd get bogged down in details since there was probably a good reason, at least initially for the said spending. However, if you really, wanted to make a spectacular mess then hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later would be the way to do it. Somebody, somewhere, thought this was a good approach. How could they not know it would turn into a massive clusterfuck. Hubris?
- cwillu 1y ago
  Searching the page for “hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later” shows two results, was that intended?
  - smackay 1y ago
    Not at all, the slightly snarky wording, was typed on the spur of the moment. Incidentally, I tried the same terms on Google and the AI-powered answer was rather informative with the pros and cons of the approach. Indeed the cons seem to be playing out before our very eyes.
- polygotdomain 1y ago
  To start, it was clear that many were Musk fan boys. I don't think "bright" was a driving force, but "young, with no prior experience" would be great if you wanted people to make decisions that have the potential to negatively impact millions of lives. You need people with a lack of context to realize those are the stakes at hand. Since it was also clear they were going to "throw AI at it", I also doubt they were looking for anyone who acknowledged the shortcomings and pitfalls of an all AI approach. I think this approach got them exactly what they wanted. Musk clearly wanted access to as much data as he could get his hands onto; legally or not. There were contracts and investigations into Musk's interest that he wanted control over, and got. Overall, chaos is not seen as an issue for those in this administration. The attitude from the top was clearly that these agencies and contractors "deserved it" for some reason, even though they have no idea what they really do or why they're doing it.
nop_slide 1y ago
Relevant Github repo of the code he apparently used from the article: https://github.com/slavingia/va https://github.com/slavingia/va
- gorbachev 1y ago
  Is there a way to -star a github repo?
mountainb 1y ago
"That’s not possible — you have 90,000 contracts,” he said. “Unless you write some code. But even then it’s not really possible.” This entirely possible with some lawyers, some business analysts, perhaps some hospital administrative consultants, and ordinary support staff. That team might even use LLMs in some capacity but not in the way described by the article. Reviewing 90,000 hospital and other service contracts sounds like just another project for a mid-sized or big law firm; or the government. That is how those contracts were created in the first place. This is like the meme about someone's uncle talking about how there are these 90,000 contracts that no one knows how to review because we've forgotten how to do it. If there's something America still knows how to do it's how to review tens of thousands of turgid government contracts.
- ianhawes 1y ago
  Not possible within the 30 day timeframe they were given.
  - mountainb 1y ago
    With the right teams and resources, this could be done in a shorter time. With that team and skillset there was no way to complete this in a way that did not result in a lot of contract liability to the government and other silliness.
    - quickthrowman 1y ago
      At 20 working days, that’s 4,500 contracts per day. How big of a team do you think it would take to review 4,500 contracts per day?
      - rsynnott 1y ago
        Quite a big team. However, not necessarily a difficult one to staff. That said, the whole thing rests on completely artificial urgency; there's no reason that it had to be done in 30 days (and there _are_ sensible heuristic ways that it could be filtered down; for instance small contracts and those about to expire could be filtered out easily; the article mentions a $35k contract, which is definitely "not worth the bother" level). "We have a completely artificial deadline, therefore we can't do this properly, therefore we should just do a completely nonsense thing" is not a reasonable approach to doing anything.
SV_BubbleTime 1y ago
[flagged]
- throwaway173738 1y ago
  No, we don’t have to give some people the benefit of the doubt. When someone tells you who they are, listen. And I’m not talking about the patsies being interviewed here. Tell me, when are our taxes supposed to go down from this? This year? Or next? Or are we going to spend the money some other way instead? What was the point of any of this?
- kacesensitive 1y ago
  Or maybe you are so politically tainted that it gives you a rosey filter on the insanity?
  - SV_BubbleTime 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - kacesensitive 1y ago
      Go read the propublica article and tell me the findings are anything less than insane.
      - SV_BubbleTime 1y ago
        [flagged]
TrackerFF 1y ago
They also put a 23 year old to essentially greenlight or stop NSF grants. https://www.techdirt.com/2025/06/02/a-23-year-old-crypto-bro-is-now-vetoing-nsf-grants-while-staring-at-his-water-bottle/ https://www.techdirt.com/2025/06/02/a-23-year-old-crypto-bro... I just don't understand how these people can do what they do? If I was a fresh college grad, and put in that position - to have the final say on whether experts in their fields can get grants, to conduct research on something I have no expertise in...I don't think I could do that job. I'd feel like the biggest empty suit in existence. Don't they feel any shame? Or do they suffer from some superiority complex, where they think that whatever knowledge they have in AI/ML makes them the smartest person in the room? EDIT: Reading through it, at least the guy acknowledges his errors.
- morkalork 1y ago
  There is a belief that by having grants address DEI and other issues, you're already putting them at the mercy of unqualified individuals and as such "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". Now of course there's some pretty big, atrocious, historical reasons why those parts of the grant application exist.
- kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
  > I just don't understand how these people can do what they do It's narcissistic personality disorder. The 45th administration had a surfeit of responsible adults putting up guard rails to contain the future felon. This one has taken the Hitler youth approach to recruiting like-minded individuals with an inflated sense of their own competence. Minimal critical thinking skills and life experience are a checkbox in the hiring process.
- insane_dreamer 1y ago
  > I don't think I could do that job. I'd feel like the biggest empty suit in existence. You don't have that level of arrogance. But I've met people who do. They're the worst people to work with.
zenburnmyface 1y ago
Lavingia should be ostracized from tech for this. What an embarrassment.
mhalle 1y ago
His github repository also contains the code that prompts OpenAI to analyze and flag VA memos that might contradict hot button issues from Trump's Executive orders. https://github.com/slavingia/va/blob/main/eos/analyze_eos.py https://github.com/slavingia/va/blob/main/eos/analyze_eos.py System prompt: You are an AI assistant that analyzes internal government memos for compliance with 2025 Executive Orders. You identify references to DEI, gender identity, COVID policies, climate initiatives, and WHO partnerships that must be removed or modified according to new directives. Provide detailed analysis and be precise about what needs to be changed." User prompt: Based on this memo analysis, provide a detailed assessment of non-compliance with 2025 Executive Orders: MEMO CONTENT: {text[:10000]} Rules for determining non-compliance: 1. DEI/DEIA Content: - References to "diversity", "equity", "inclusion" in policy context - Mentions of equity action plans - References to Chief Diversity Officers or similar roles - Performance criteria based on DEI targets 2. Gender Identity Content: - References to gender identity or preferred pronouns - Content about gender ideology or training - Instructions to use non-binary pronouns 3. COVID Policy/Telework: - COVID-19 vaccination requirements - Pandemic-era remote work extensions - Masking or testing policies that remain in effect 4. Climate/Environmental Content: - References to climate resilience, zero-emission requirements - Environmental justice language - Sustainability criteria in purchasing/contracting - Plastic straw bans or similar procurement restrictions 5. WHO Partnerships: - References to World Health Organization partnerships - Alignment with WHO protocols or frameworks 6. Other Key Areas: - Affirmative action or racial/gender preferences in contracting - $15 federal contractor minimum wage references - Student loan forgiveness expansions - Paper check disbursement references [Edit: formatting.]
liampulles 1y ago
On the surface, the principle of using AI to filter down contracts for human review seems like a good thing, because it increases efficiency. Especially if it makes something previously infeasible and/or very expensive now doable and/or relatively cheap. Where it would become bad for me is if the next step is taken to remove humans from the loop, or more simply if the AI is not tested for accuracy regularly and updated as the nature of the world changes. Unfortunately, I think the chance of these outcomes occurring is high. I've worked with LLMs to aid humans in the domain of text review. I've encountered inexplicable inaccuracies that are very difficult to robustly remove from the system (you can patch one thing and then another pops up when you try some new data). I've found it very difficult to try and explain this issue to business people: I suggested that there needed to be humans in the loop, because it seemed like some level of inaccuracy is insoluble. This is not ideal for the business, because obviously it hurts their ability to scale (reasonable). Also from the perspective of business people I've interacted with: AI is the greatest thing since the invention of the transistor, and its only a matter of time until these LLMs are perfectly intelligent (not reasonable), and vitally important that they get ahead of the curve before potential competitors do. I can just see how this issue is going to lead to so many important aspects of our society being eaten up by imperfect software that we are forced to accept, because there are not competitors able to justify a less scalable and accurate alternative. I hope I'm wrong, but until then I hope people will flag this sort of shit when they see it.
RickJWagner 1y ago
Glad to see AI being put to use with the big wheels of government. It’s inevitable, might as well start setting up best practices.
insane_dreamer 1y ago
Arrogance, inexperience, and haste, is a really bad combination when it comes to building fault-tolerant code. And when you're handling government systems, you need fault-tolerant code. This isn't some Tinder app. Would you hire any ex-DOGE engineer? I ~~probably~~ would not.
cavisne 1y ago
Anyone who thinks the VA is well run should watch a few episodes of the “financial audit” YouTube channel. The most financially irresponsible people in the world (and generally bad people in general). Almost all are cashing a “disability” payment from the VA.

156 points by afavour 1y ago

bix6 1y ago

This is honestly unbelievable. Sahil wrote code he knew was bad and it was used to terminate vital medical contracts… how is that not fraud against every person who pays taxes?

jaoane 1y ago
[flagged]
- SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
  I think there's a difference between incompetently squandering government resources and intentionally tearing things apart. Sure, a lot of the time people in government are driving around while staring at their cell phone, but these Doge minions are intentionally driving on the sidewalk because they like hearing the sound of bodies hitting the windshield.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  There's a difference between incompetence and recklessness; not all "oops, I did a stupid thing"s are equal.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
  This is a false equivalency, and it's the kind of false equivalency that is being used to excuse a tremendous amount of what the Trump administration is doing / has done.

footlose_3815 1y ago

"AI is the wrong tool to do this" someone said. Different things need to be addressed, like how someone is able to act outside all three branches of government, and have enough power to destroy the lives of those who protected our country when we needed them most. It should be crystal clear to even the most skeptical people should turn their opinion on how they bankrupt the poor and bail out the rich every single time.

rsynnott 1y ago

This whole thing is just kind of astonishing. > “I think that mistakes were made,” said Lavingia, who worked at DOGE for nearly two months. “I’m sure mistakes were made. Mistakes are always made. I would never recommend someone run my code and do what it says. It’s like that ‘Office’ episode where Steve Carell drives into the lake because Google Maps says drive into the lake. Do not drive into the lake.” Well, then why the hell did you write it? For purely entertainment purposes? I mean, what. EDIT: Oh, wow, just got to the prompt. Did he... did he just think LLMs were _magic_? "Level 1: Necessary consultants that can't be insourced" - how the hell is ChatGPT supposed to know what can and cannot be insourced? > In late March, Lavingia published a version of the “munchable” script on his GitHub account to invite others to use and improve it, he told ProPublica. “It would have been cool if the entire federal government used this script and anyone in the public could see that this is how the VA is thinking about cutting contracts.” No, that would not have been 'cool', you idiot. Bloody hell.

John23832 1y ago
... and get paid to do it while sidelining anyone with actual experience in the sector/topic. I called this when it started. They would come in, be totally ineffective to the point of breaking things, and then we would get a "shucks, sorry" later.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  I just can't believe how totally incompetent this whole thing is. Even for a Musk/Trump venture, I didn't expect quite this level of just complete nonsense.
  - nxobject 1y ago
    Imagine hiring a consultancy, and getting stuck with a team of people fresh out of college without any wisdom to guide them... I think that's what the American people got.
    - colejohnson66 1y ago

xnx 1y ago

This is all facilitated by congress and the president. Destruction under any pretense was the goal. They must all be voted out.

glookler 1y ago
Voted out? Crimes have been committed and the President as dictator nonsense has to be cancelled so these people can all go to federal prison where white collar criminals belong.
- masfuerte 1y ago
  But there is no way that is happening while they remain in power.
  - dylan604 1y ago
    Even out of power, there's no way. SCOTUS said the prez is untouchable. The only hope is that a sweeping change in Congress happens with the mid-terms enough to be able to impeach and convict. But the likelihood of that can be summed up with "wish in one hand and shit in the other. see which fills up faster"
    - saubeidl 1y ago
      The second amendment was written to have a recourse in case of tyranny.
      - dylan604 1y ago
        That's the nuclear option though. There should be plenty of more diplomatic ways before hit the big red button. Sadly, those options that we thought were there have been shown to only be a valid option if you have people with spine to stand up and utilize the options. Instead, we've seen where kowtowing has been the norm for so long that we seem to have lost our collective spine. Watching the Obama admin capitulate to the then speaker preventing his nominee from moving forward was abysmal. There was no valid reasoning for it, but it laid the ground work for why the bench looks like it does. There are plenty of other prior examples of the spines of the minority being brow beat to the point that not allowing POTUS to move his nominee forward was a collective should shrug

eviks 1y ago

Expected levels of YOLO incompetence, but still fascinating.

joshstrange 1y ago

> “I think that mistakes were made,” said Lavingia, who worked at DOGE for nearly two months. “I’m sure mistakes were made. Mistakes are always made. I would never recommend someone run my code and do what it says. It’s like that ‘Office’ episode where Steve Carell drives into the lake because Google Maps says drive into the lake. Do not drive into the lake.” Sahil Lavingia is a snake. I thought his blog post that was on HN a week or so ago displayed a frightening level of cognitive dissidence and now he wants to distance himself from it all. No way buddy, this will be a millstone hung around your neck. You encouraged this, you participated in this, you cheered this, you will live with the consequences.

mvid 1y ago
He will probably become a Thiel fellow or raise from YC

smackay 1y ago

I'd be very interested in learning more about how DOGE got staffed. If your goal was to dramatically cut government spending, then hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later would be the way to do it, otherwise you'd get bogged down in details since there was probably a good reason, at least initially for the said spending. However, if you really, wanted to make a spectacular mess then hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later would be the way to do it. Somebody, somewhere, thought this was a good approach. How could they not know it would turn into a massive clusterfuck. Hubris?

cwillu 1y ago
Searching the page for “hiring bright, young people, with no prior experience, who axed first, and asked questions later” shows two results, was that intended?
- smackay 1y ago
  Not at all, the slightly snarky wording, was typed on the spur of the moment. Incidentally, I tried the same terms on Google and the AI-powered answer was rather informative with the pros and cons of the approach. Indeed the cons seem to be playing out before our very eyes.
polygotdomain 1y ago
To start, it was clear that many were Musk fan boys. I don't think "bright" was a driving force, but "young, with no prior experience" would be great if you wanted people to make decisions that have the potential to negatively impact millions of lives. You need people with a lack of context to realize those are the stakes at hand. Since it was also clear they were going to "throw AI at it", I also doubt they were looking for anyone who acknowledged the shortcomings and pitfalls of an all AI approach. I think this approach got them exactly what they wanted. Musk clearly wanted access to as much data as he could get his hands onto; legally or not. There were contracts and investigations into Musk's interest that he wanted control over, and got. Overall, chaos is not seen as an issue for those in this administration. The attitude from the top was clearly that these agencies and contractors "deserved it" for some reason, even though they have no idea what they really do or why they're doing it.

nop_slide 1y ago

Relevant Github repo of the code he apparently used from the article: https://github.com/slavingia/va https://github.com/slavingia/va

gorbachev 1y ago
Is there a way to -star a github repo?

mountainb 1y ago

"That’s not possible — you have 90,000 contracts,” he said. “Unless you write some code. But even then it’s not really possible.” This entirely possible with some lawyers, some business analysts, perhaps some hospital administrative consultants, and ordinary support staff. That team might even use LLMs in some capacity but not in the way described by the article. Reviewing 90,000 hospital and other service contracts sounds like just another project for a mid-sized or big law firm; or the government. That is how those contracts were created in the first place. This is like the meme about someone's uncle talking about how there are these 90,000 contracts that no one knows how to review because we've forgotten how to do it. If there's something America still knows how to do it's how to review tens of thousands of turgid government contracts.

ianhawes 1y ago
Not possible within the 30 day timeframe they were given.
- mountainb 1y ago
  With the right teams and resources, this could be done in a shorter time. With that team and skillset there was no way to complete this in a way that did not result in a lot of contract liability to the government and other silliness.
  - quickthrowman 1y ago
    At 20 working days, that’s 4,500 contracts per day. How big of a team do you think it would take to review 4,500 contracts per day?
    - rsynnott 1y ago
      Quite a big team. However, not necessarily a difficult one to staff. That said, the whole thing rests on completely artificial urgency; there's no reason that it had to be done in 30 days (and there _are_ sensible heuristic ways that it could be filtered down; for instance small contracts and those about to expire could be filtered out easily; the article mentions a $35k contract, which is definitely "not worth the bother" level). "We have a completely artificial deadline, therefore we can't do this properly, therefore we should just do a completely nonsense thing" is not a reasonable approach to doing anything.

SV_BubbleTime 1y ago

[flagged]

throwaway173738 1y ago
No, we don’t have to give some people the benefit of the doubt. When someone tells you who they are, listen. And I’m not talking about the patsies being interviewed here. Tell me, when are our taxes supposed to go down from this? This year? Or next? Or are we going to spend the money some other way instead? What was the point of any of this?
kacesensitive 1y ago
Or maybe you are so politically tainted that it gives you a rosey filter on the insanity?
- SV_BubbleTime 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - kacesensitive 1y ago
    Go read the propublica article and tell me the findings are anything less than insane.
    - SV_BubbleTime 1y ago
      [flagged]

TrackerFF 1y ago

They also put a 23 year old to essentially greenlight or stop NSF grants. https://www.techdirt.com/2025/06/02/a-23-year-old-crypto-bro-is-now-vetoing-nsf-grants-while-staring-at-his-water-bottle/ https://www.techdirt.com/2025/06/02/a-23-year-old-crypto-bro... I just don't understand how these people can do what they do? If I was a fresh college grad, and put in that position - to have the final say on whether experts in their fields can get grants, to conduct research on something I have no expertise in...I don't think I could do that job. I'd feel like the biggest empty suit in existence. Don't they feel any shame? Or do they suffer from some superiority complex, where they think that whatever knowledge they have in AI/ML makes them the smartest person in the room? EDIT: Reading through it, at least the guy acknowledges his errors.

morkalork 1y ago
There is a belief that by having grants address DEI and other issues, you're already putting them at the mercy of unqualified individuals and as such "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". Now of course there's some pretty big, atrocious, historical reasons why those parts of the grant application exist.
kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
> I just don't understand how these people can do what they do It's narcissistic personality disorder. The 45th administration had a surfeit of responsible adults putting up guard rails to contain the future felon. This one has taken the Hitler youth approach to recruiting like-minded individuals with an inflated sense of their own competence. Minimal critical thinking skills and life experience are a checkbox in the hiring process.
insane_dreamer 1y ago
> I don't think I could do that job. I'd feel like the biggest empty suit in existence. You don't have that level of arrogance. But I've met people who do. They're the worst people to work with.

zenburnmyface 1y ago

Lavingia should be ostracized from tech for this. What an embarrassment.

mhalle 1y ago

His github repository also contains the code that prompts OpenAI to analyze and flag VA memos that might contradict hot button issues from Trump's Executive orders. https://github.com/slavingia/va/blob/main/eos/analyze_eos.py https://github.com/slavingia/va/blob/main/eos/analyze_eos.py System prompt: You are an AI assistant that analyzes internal government memos for compliance with 2025 Executive Orders. You identify references to DEI, gender identity, COVID policies, climate initiatives, and WHO partnerships that must be removed or modified according to new directives. Provide detailed analysis and be precise about what needs to be changed." User prompt: Based on this memo analysis, provide a detailed assessment of non-compliance with 2025 Executive Orders: MEMO CONTENT: {text[:10000]} Rules for determining non-compliance: 1. DEI/DEIA Content: - References to "diversity", "equity", "inclusion" in policy context - Mentions of equity action plans - References to Chief Diversity Officers or similar roles - Performance criteria based on DEI targets 2. Gender Identity Content: - References to gender identity or preferred pronouns - Content about gender ideology or training - Instructions to use non-binary pronouns 3. COVID Policy/Telework: - COVID-19 vaccination requirements - Pandemic-era remote work extensions - Masking or testing policies that remain in effect 4. Climate/Environmental Content: - References to climate resilience, zero-emission requirements - Environmental justice language - Sustainability criteria in purchasing/contracting - Plastic straw bans or similar procurement restrictions 5. WHO Partnerships: - References to World Health Organization partnerships - Alignment with WHO protocols or frameworks 6. Other Key Areas: - Affirmative action or racial/gender preferences in contracting - $15 federal contractor minimum wage references - Student loan forgiveness expansions - Paper check disbursement references [Edit: formatting.]

liampulles 1y ago

On the surface, the principle of using AI to filter down contracts for human review seems like a good thing, because it increases efficiency. Especially if it makes something previously infeasible and/or very expensive now doable and/or relatively cheap. Where it would become bad for me is if the next step is taken to remove humans from the loop, or more simply if the AI is not tested for accuracy regularly and updated as the nature of the world changes. Unfortunately, I think the chance of these outcomes occurring is high. I've worked with LLMs to aid humans in the domain of text review. I've encountered inexplicable inaccuracies that are very difficult to robustly remove from the system (you can patch one thing and then another pops up when you try some new data). I've found it very difficult to try and explain this issue to business people: I suggested that there needed to be humans in the loop, because it seemed like some level of inaccuracy is insoluble. This is not ideal for the business, because obviously it hurts their ability to scale (reasonable). Also from the perspective of business people I've interacted with: AI is the greatest thing since the invention of the transistor, and its only a matter of time until these LLMs are perfectly intelligent (not reasonable), and vitally important that they get ahead of the curve before potential competitors do. I can just see how this issue is going to lead to so many important aspects of our society being eaten up by imperfect software that we are forced to accept, because there are not competitors able to justify a less scalable and accurate alternative. I hope I'm wrong, but until then I hope people will flag this sort of shit when they see it.

RickJWagner 1y ago

Glad to see AI being put to use with the big wheels of government. It’s inevitable, might as well start setting up best practices.

insane_dreamer 1y ago

Arrogance, inexperience, and haste, is a really bad combination when it comes to building fault-tolerant code. And when you're handling government systems, you need fault-tolerant code. This isn't some Tinder app. Would you hire any ex-DOGE engineer? I ~~probably~~ would not.

cavisne 1y ago

Anyone who thinks the VA is well run should watch a few episodes of the “financial audit” YouTube channel. The most financially irresponsible people in the world (and generally bad people in general). Almost all are cashing a “disability” payment from the VA.