3 ms·
Why would that exclude them from the running? Should government contracts not be granted on the merits of the receivers? Grok clearly exists in this space so it
by koolba 1y ago
Why would that exclude them from the running? Should government contracts not be granted on the merits of the receivers? Grok clearly exists in this space so it’s not like they’re rewarding vaporware.
- jedberg 1y ago> Should government contracts not be granted on the merits of the receivers? They should, but businesses owned by government employees should be excluded because it's too easy to corrupt the process. In fact, they have explicit rules about not doing that.
- koolba 1y agoBut he’s no longer a “special government employee” anymore either. Or are you suggesting he’s blacklisted from all government contracts for life because he previously worked for the current administration?
- unshavedyak 1y agoNot OP, but "For life" is a far cry from a month or two after. But yes, i'd argue we have no choice but to attempt to aggressively put bounds between government and profiteering. Lest we have Congress openly insider trade..
- jedberg 1y agoOf course not for life, but generally to avoid ethics issues the government requires you to be out for at least a year or two before engaging in business with the government.
- buzzerbetrayed 1y agoHe’s not a government employee. You said it yourself lol
- jedberg 1y agoBut he was very recently. Usually you have to wait a while after leaving the government to sell to it.
- slantedview 1y ago> Should government contracts not be granted on the merits of the receivers? The merits? We just had, in the last _week_, a huge scaldal where Grok was spewing racist, pro hitler content, even calling itself MechaHitler.