31–40 of 148 posts
It's my dream to work at USDS. First I need to save enough money to cover the difference in salary for 2-3 years.
"U.S. Digital Service salaries are set in accordance with the General Schedule Pay Scale, which is capped at $160,300." That's not bad, but not great for really high talent employees. I wonder how many people get that rate though. https://www.usds.gov/join#compensation
The federal government hires a team of young, talented, motivated engineers and managers, puts them in charge of failed software projects, gives them the resources and authority they require to turns things around, and -- surprise! -- it turns out they do a GREAT job. In hindsight, this shouldn't be too surprising. What might be surprising is that the same logic should apply to ALL government functions, not just soft…
Disclosure: I'm an engineer at USDS and these are my own opinions. So in my admittedly short time in the government [0], I've witnessed how all of these problems are due to good intentions. That's what makes this all really tough because everything you think is bonkers actually has a reason. The 1400 page travel regulations is a result of trying to prevent fraud - every single issue that comes up results in a new rul…
This seems like a serious inability to understand that no process designed to prevent future things you can't forsee is 100% effective (by definition). At some point, you have to declare "good enough", and live with it until the error rate becomes unacceptable overall again, then modify it.
IE it's likely 50 pages of those regulations gave them a 99.9%+ rate of avoiding fraud. They then added 1350 pages to get to probably 99.99%
This is unlikely to be worth it.
(and yes, before someone points it out, i'm likely being generous with the numbers)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosure: I'm an engineer at USDS and these are my own opinions. So in my admittedly short time in the government [0], I've witnessed how all of these problems are due to good intentions. That's what makes this all really tough because everything you think is bonkers actually has a reason. The 1400 page travel regulations is a result of trying to prevent fraud - every single issue that comes up results in a new rul…
Thank you for posting here. The same logic applies to all those regulations that seem bonkers. If you think of all those regulations as a type of source code (which dictates what government employees and citizens can and cannot do, when, and under what conditions), it's clear that a lot of regulatory code needs major refactoring. To use your example with travel regulations, those 1400 pages designed to prevent fraud…
My (admittedly limited) experience in coding/engineering has taught me that it's unwise to look at technical problems and people problems in the same light; the former can be solved much easier than the latter. The trick is to figure out where you can solve the former to avoid the latter!
The federal government hires a team of young, talented, motivated engineers and managers, puts them in charge of failed software projects, gives them the resources and authority they require to turns things around, and -- surprise! -- it turns out they do a GREAT job. In hindsight, this shouldn't be too surprising. What might be surprising is that the same logic should apply to ALL government functions, not just soft…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosure: I'm an engineer at USDS and these are my own opinions. So in my admittedly short time in the government [0], I've witnessed how all of these problems are due to good intentions. That's what makes this all really tough because everything you think is bonkers actually has a reason. The 1400 page travel regulations is a result of trying to prevent fraud - every single issue that comes up results in a new rul…
"The 1400 page travel regulations is a result of trying to prevent fraud - every single issue that comes up results in a new rule." This seems like a serious inability to understand that no process designed to prevent future things you can't forsee is 100% effective (by definition). At some point, you have to declare "good enough", and live with it until the error rate becomes unacceptable overall again, then modify…
It's my dream to work at USDS. First I need to save enough money to cover the difference in salary for 2-3 years.
Granted everyone's got their own experiences, so YMMV I guess. Just curious where your data comes from?
The federal government hires a team of young, talented, motivated engineers and managers, puts them in charge of failed software projects, gives them the resources and authority they require to turns things around, and -- surprise! -- it turns out they do a GREAT job. In hindsight, this shouldn't be too surprising. What might be surprising is that the same logic should apply to ALL government functions, not just soft…
The federal government hires a team of young, talented, motivated engineers and managers, puts them in charge of failed software projects, gives them the resources and authority they require to turns things around, and -- surprise! -- it turns out they do a GREAT job. In hindsight, this shouldn't be too surprising. What might be surprising is that the same logic should apply to ALL government functions, not just soft…
>...young... This the first and presumably most important requirement in you opinion? Interesting. May I ask, how did you extrpolate it was a property of the team at all let alone responsible for its success let alone the first component of that success?
"U.S. Digital Service salaries are set in accordance with the General Schedule Pay Scale, which is capped at $160,300." That's not bad, but not great for really high talent employees. I wonder how many people get that rate though. https://www.usds.gov/join#compensation