Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | miltonlost's comments login

Francis Bacon created modern-day science with his development of the philosophy behind the scientific method. Your definition of philosophy might be exceedingly narrow and focused on contemporary issues. And even that ignores Karl Popper’s falsifiability

It's almost as if they're being willfully obtuse and acting in bad faith.

And yet there's a Return To Office mandate, and now selling off offices. You're trying to rationalize selling off

Nah, disconnecting and then treating workers as if their outside lives and work lives are fungible is pretty evil.

Okay, now that these are clearly against the stated goals, you must then ask and answer for yourself: what are DOGE's unstated goals?

By looking at Musk's tweets about it being a "far-left" group (plus his two Nazi salutes) and DOGE's emphasis on cutting DEI/sexual and racial minority programs, the unstated goals are clear and loud. If you don't look for the unstated goals and only listen to people's words rather than their actions, you're going to be blindsided by a lot more cruelty and not see it coming.


DOGE's emphasis on cutting DEI/sexual and racial minority programs

And now gutting the agency that enforced basic employment laws.

Say goodbye to the 40-hour work week.


You can make up absolutely anything and call it an unstated goal.

You shouldn't be convinced. Republicans are lying when they say they want to cut the deficit or pay off the debt. You only have to look at the Bush years and Trump's 2016-2020 administration to see increasing deficits every single year, due to tax cuts rather than any sort of spending problem. When they are in power, they dismantle good government and regulations and redistribute American wealth from the poor and middle class up to the wealthy.

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/natio...

The US has a tax problem with billionaires. We don't have a spending issue.


I lived in a very red state though I definitely don't fit that banner.

I'd warn you against trying to lump anyone in a party, or that generally votes for one party, under one big umbrella. I know republican voters that actually care about cutting the deficit. I also know republican voters that align that way for only one topic that matters most to them, abortion for example.

All republicans aren't the same just like all democrats aren't the same. For better or worse our system only really offers us two choices - that doesn't mean that there are only two types of Americans with one of only two specific set of views.


Reagan also ran huge deficits because of tax cuts and military expansion.

You support DOGE's mission, but not a fan of this decision? Destroying 18F entirely consistent with DOGE's mission and Trump's goals. Why this decision then and not all their other ones?

You wrote a lot of words saying very little.


I'm just an outsider here but it seems very obvious to me that someone could both 1) support the (stated) mission of saving taxpayers' money and reducing the US national debt, and 2) disagree with a specific cut

The stated mission is unavoidably at odds with the implementation.

The gains to be had are pointlessly minuscule in comparison to the federal budget and the actual cost to Americans is extreme.


I think you could make a reasonable argument that their actions aren't actually effective at implementing their mission. I'm not really in a position to judge that, personally. I was just saying I don't think it requires any great cognitive dissonance for GP to agree with their mission but disagree with a specific cut, as was sort of implied by the reply above.

I generally like my own government but I similarly think they've made some serious blunders at times. I don't think that's a huge contradiction (I'm not American FWIW...)


I guess it's the "Stated" mission that I find impossible to believe is the truth. DOGE clearly is not supposed to be about "saving tax payers money" when they include DEI reviews as well. So even your definition removes the baggage of the racism/transphobia/homophobia/misogyny by focusing only on the money when DOGE has not been focused solely on money in the slightest.

Anyone who trusts the "stated" mission of DOGE is a simple child who hasn't followed project 2025


Let's please avoid ad hominem here. I don't think that's contributing to the discussion in the spirit of HN.

I support DOGE’s stated mission - the elimination of redundancy and reform with an eye toward efficiency in general.

Eliminating 18F does not fit into either of those categories.

I believe it was eliminated because it was staffed with people who almost exclusively opposed the current administration’s agenda. This as a political decision.

I’m trying to say that when I put myself in the position of Trump and his administration, I understand why 18F was cut, while simultaneously stating that my belief that 18F did good work and we’ll be worse off without them.


Remote work doesn't mean it's dead. 91 employees also doesn't mean it's dead. 18F still was a large active team. You are redefining dead to excuse the inexcusable.

I'm not amazed. The only people who consider that politicization was done to Trump administration are Trump supporters and people who have money to gain by ignoring Jan 6 or his constant attacks on anybody that doesn't support him. To be a Republican today is to be a hypocrite in name, action, deed, and as a key part of your core moral system.

Federal workers swear an oath to defend the COnsitution against enemies foreign and domestic. When the President is commiting crimes in public and is a blatant tool of Russia, the "good federal workers" must resist as part of their OATH TO THE COUNTRY. It's their oath to resist Trump.

This was January 2017.

> And none of the “good federal workers” spoke up against that. American voters deserve a civil service that will work as hard on mass deportations under Trump as they did on open borders under Biden.

The US is a constitutional republic, not an Athenian democracy. The whole purpose of constitutions is to act as checks against base majoritarian impulses.


The system of “checks and balances” is between Congress, the President, and the Judiciary. Show me where in the constitution it says employees of the executive branch are constitutional actors that have a role within that system?

You might be thinking of unitary executive theory, which is harebrained right-wing fringe nonsense. Public servants in the US swear an oath to the constitution, not to the president, and have an obligation to disobey clearly unconstitutional orders no matter the personal cost (that's what swearing an oath means).

The January 2017 “Resistance” wasn’t about “clearly unconstitutional orders.” It was about opposing Trump’s lawful policies on immigration and the environment.

Everyone agrees civil servants can disobey “clearly unconstitutional orders.” But civil servants must work equally hard to execute the policies of the president regardless of party, right? Biden’s student loan forgiveness was based on thin but colorable legal interpretations that were ultimately found to be incorrect. Civil servants who worked to implement Biden’s policies must work just as hard to implement Trump’s executive order say effectuating mass deportations, correct?


Incorrect. Civil servants must follow the law, and professional obligations must be balanced with ethical and legal boundaries.

Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: