Congress is clueless about tech because it killed its tutor

Post by jbpetersen » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:19 PM UTC

capote wrote: post #28

toomuchtodo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the same time, are they experienced in CRUD apps? Probably not. Solve the right problem with the right people.

The OTA doesn't need devs and Facebook engineers, they're not developing CRUD apps, and they don't need to know what CRUD is. They need to be well educated, qualified professionals who are capable of advising the government on technology issues that affect the whole population. They need to be well-rounded and capable of seeing things both from many perspectives, including those of tech company engineering department…

Post by pklausler » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 8:05 PM UTC

d33 wrote: post #48

quanticle wrote: post #15

These are also (largely) the same Congresspeople who voted to reduce funding to NOAA, because, as it turns out, weather satellites are a good source of evidence in favor of man-made climate change.

Hopefully at some point they'd get too dumb to be able to enter the congress and something a bit cooler will ensue from the imminent anarchy... In the meantime, say "hi" to Trump.

Post by EdHominem » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 10:02 PM UTC

FussyZeus wrote: post #54

toomuchtodo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the same time, are they experienced in CRUD apps? Probably not. Solve the right problem with the right people.

I'm struggling to think of something more irrelevant to the technical needs of legislators than some fad storage technology.

Post by krapp » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 10:22 PM UTC

EdHominem wrote: post #56

jonathankoren wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. That's a rather modern invention of the 1970s. It was to create a state militia, that's why it talks specifically talks about a "Militia" (capitalization original). It's prima facie absurd to think that the very document that defines treason as "levying war against [the United States]" and talks about using "Militia to [...] suppress Insurrections" would also codify insurrection as a good thing.

A Militia is armed people. Because Militias were a good thing for the people, a right to bear arms shall not be abolished. But anyways, the reasoning is just reasoning. The right is pretty clearly spelled out and stands on its own.

Post by krapp » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 10:45 PM UTC

OliverJones wrote: post #40

Unfortunately, the US Congress is a failed institution: proudly ignorant, uncooperative, and inwardly focused. It pains me to say it, but that failure is one eventuality the second amendment to the US Constitution contemplated.