Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI.gov

ai.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 266 posts

Re: AI.gov

#151

Post by wslack »

mmedellin wrote: post #56
empath-nirvana wrote: post #9

The US government can't legally pay the salaries required to find AI experts right now (just look at the salaries on the open positions). So all this work will end up being done by contractors who _can_ pay those salaries while the contractors skim off the top. The US really needs a special schedule for software developers if they want technical expertise in house (and they really should have technical expertise in h…

This is most acutely felt in acquisitions where those responsible for deciding what to build and buy have very limited understanding of software development. The failed rollout of healthcare.gov is the billboard for this problem. There's an effort to train civilian acquisition professionals on how to buy and build better software, but they are pretty quickly hired by contractors or the commercial sector since their n…

> I do think an overhaul of the civilian service is worth exploring.

There are decades of reports and proposals about this. Unfortunately, we keep learning the same lessons over and over.

Re: AI.gov

#152

Post by wslack »

acdha wrote: post #100
mattnewton wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t they just use the contractor loophole?

They can but that has several widespread problems: the biggest is that you need skilled people in the government who can review bids and oversee work – otherwise you get a $10M contact form because someone at BigCo1 wanted to play buzzword bingo and keep their buddies employed, and the “overseer” from BigCo2 wasn’t going to saying the team, often former coworkers, wasn’t performing well because that’d invite honest g…

> the biggest is that you need skilled people in the government who can review bids and oversee work

It's also very isolating to be the "one person" who knows the subject area. Having teams of folks is much more sustainable.

Re: AI.gov

#153

Post by wslack »

forthwall wrote: post #148

I would really love to work for the USDS; ever since their big publicity outreach during the obama admin, too bad the salaries are abysmal comparably to most tech companies. 184k top band in san francisco; 150k in DC. I could join a mid tier firm in SF for 250k base; not even bonus for a senior level. I wish they could create a special schedule.

FWIW both DC and SF top out at 183,500 now.

Re: AI.gov

#154

Post by wslack »

93po wrote: post #109
jjcm wrote: post #94

The Presidential Innovation Fellow is the highest level role they're offering as part of this. For this, the requirements are "mid-senior/executive career professional experience in a subject matter expertise" with "experience collaborating with and leading cross-functional teams". The requirements feel analogous to a staff/principal level role in the software industry, so just for comparison here's the compensation…

I assume they're targeting people who aren't competitive candidates for big high paying companies. There's plenty of super mediocre to bad developers out there (myself included) that would never stand a chance applying there. I've been developing software for a decade and the most I've ever made is $110k, and that was in high cost of living areas like Denver and Seattle.

The pay cap is set in law, but you need people sufficiently invested in the mission to forgo a higher possible salary, which isn't possible for everyone (especially folks who might have to support their parents).

Re: AI.gov

#155

Post by curiousllama »

empath-nirvana wrote: post #9

The US government can't legally pay the salaries required to find AI experts right now (just look at the salaries on the open positions). So all this work will end up being done by contractors who _can_ pay those salaries while the contractors skim off the top. The US really needs a special schedule for software developers if they want technical expertise in house (and they really should have technical expertise in h…

> The US really needs a special schedule for software developers

There's actually precedent for this - SEC lawyers are on the SK pay scale, not GS.

It's exactly the same problem: the alternatives in finance were too lucrative to retain competent enough attorneys to regulate wall street.

Congress should create a separate tech pay scale, given the alternatives are too lucrative to retain competent enough engineers.

Re: AI.gov

#156

Post by wslack »

lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #123
robg wrote: post #113

I was a Presidential Innovation Fellow for almost three years at FDA / Veterans Affairs, happy to answer any questions. The program is looking for industry experiences to better inform and shape government policies.

Do you have any tips on how to stand out in the crowd? What is the government looking for in an application, generally?

Serving at USDS, posting personally. The biggest thing with the gov is the requirements on usajobs are always explained specifically so you know exactly what is needed.

Beyond that, you'll want to show in your resume how you've delivered successfully and ideally in challenging circumstances, because working in the gov can be challenging. It will really vary depending on the job and agency.

Re: AI.gov

#157

Post by tsunamifury »

layer8 wrote: post #110
paulddraper wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> America's global brain drain might have been the single most effective strategy that the planet has seen so far... > The only question is if the rest of the world is going to wake up and counter this. Probably not. Simply put, there's no first-world country in the world where top talent can earn even close to a US salary, which largely due to the fact that US is relatively permissive towards large income disparitie…

At the same time, moving to the US is unattractive for a significant portion of the talent (not the least due to the US’ socio-cultural-political climate), and working remotely for a US company comes with its own difficulties.

Haha this is such a globally out of touch statement. Yes a few European nations enjoy a much better quality of life while looking down their noses at the rest of us, blocking immigration, and generally being xenophobic.

And it’s not like the climate in Europe isn’t verging on ethno fascism in several major state…

Re: AI.gov

#158

Post by wslack »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #40
jmac01 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is, government is too..... Conservative? :p Maybe we are just feeling the effects that the modern American "left" is basically just the American right of the 60s lol We need some actual liberals who aren't just socially liberal but also willing to spend money on new ideas.

We spend plenty of money on ideas. We need to pay for results. We should stop pretending government is ever going to be good at buying/building tech and change procurement to pay for innovative results. How many $50 or $100M government tech projects have to fail before we let them post an RFP that basically says do this thing in this amount of time for this amount of money with payment after we get the “thing” in tim…

> we let them post an RFP that basically says do this thing in this amount of time for this amount of money with payment after we get the “thing” in time.

These exist; they are called "firm fixed price" contracts. You still have to write the contract correctly to be outcomes focused, and that can be hard when you don't know until building/testing if you are building the right thing.[1]

1: https://derisking-guide.18f.gov/federal-field-guide/deciding...

Re: AI.gov

#159

Post by cj »

RIMR wrote: post #81
cj wrote: post #16

This CNBC article has a good description of what's in the executive order that was issued. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/30/biden-unveils-us-governments...

What does this have to do with the USAjobs portal that this thread is about?

Perhaps it's not related at all. I assumed (incorrectly) that ai.gov is a new site connected to the exec order.

Re: AI.gov

#160

Post by _gmax0 »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #140
claytongulick wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was recruited by, and damn near did a tour with USDS. I ended up passing on it. They wanted an "entrepreneur in residence" to help drive change, which sounded great to me. Then they did the whole "we need you to keep in a cup" thing. I wouldn't have had any problem passing the test, but I told the recruiter "this is where the change needs to start". There's no way I can attract and retain good technical talent if w…

I mean no offense, but this is sort of, with regard to your principles at least, cutting off one's nose to spite one's face? I get that incremental reform is frustrating, but here you had a chance to enter an org you know needed changes, and you blew it because you refused to take a basic drug test that you openly state you could've passed easily. Like, it's bullshit that they asked, it is an invasion of privacy, it…

+1 to this sentiment.
Post reply on HN