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

211–220 of 266 posts

Re: AI.gov

#211

Post by philsnow »

sngz wrote: post #185
aduffy wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recoding America[1] is an excellent book about this problem, but it extends a lot further than just contractors charging inflated rates. The government itself has a culture that is so averse to trying new things and compliance with existing policy that it's actually dangerous to the careers of civil servants to do anything innovative, because that is one of the only things they can actually be fired for. The solution…

I actually considered applying for the US Digital Services, I was okay with the salary decrease as long as I could continue to work fully remote, but they require you to work in DC. Telling ppl to take a huge pay cut AND to have to show up to the office is a huge ask.

from https://www.usds.gov/faq :

> As of April 2023, we began formally hiring remote as well as DC (local) based employees who report in-person to our D.C. office or the agency they are partnering with.

I'm also fine with the salary decrease but at least with USDS they have you work a "tour" (like a tour of duty, I guess) which lasts between 3 months and 4 years. First, that's a little ambiguous; who decides the duration of the tour? It also feels like it would be off-putting to get to the end of your fourth year and it's your best-performing year so far, but you're just Logan's Run'ed out of there. Even more so because neither Congress nor the Supreme Court, nor the overwhelming majority of state Congresses, have term limits.

from https://www.usds.gov/how-we-work ,

> With tours of service lasting no more than four years, the U.S. Digital Service brings fresh perspectives on technology and delivery to the government.

Feels like " 'fresh perspectives' for thee but not for me".

Re: AI.gov

#212

Post by spandextwins »

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…

It's not the government's job to do that.

Re: AI.gov

#213

Post by paulddraper »

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #83
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…

> largely due to the fact that US is relatively permissive towards large income disparities. Actually, its due to a shortage of highly skilled labor/specialists relative to demand. Europe benefits from more advanced math and programming talent as a result of Eastern European and Russian/Ukraine labor availability. US immigration policy puts America at a disadvantage in this regard - something they are weakly trying t…

If you're crossing borders/languages, you're crossing borders/languages.

Not sure why the barrier to using Eastern European talent would be appreciable different. (Time zones?)

> income inequality agenda

No agenda, just analysis.

If you increase income inequality, the top earners can earn more.

Re: AI.gov

#214

Post by wslack »

philsnow wrote: post #211
sngz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually considered applying for the US Digital Services, I was okay with the salary decrease as long as I could continue to work fully remote, but they require you to work in DC. Telling ppl to take a huge pay cut AND to have to show up to the office is a huge ask.

from https://www.usds.gov/faq : > As of April 2023, we began formally hiring remote as well as DC (local) based employees who report in-person to our D.C. office or the agency they are partnering with. I'm also fine with the salary decrease but at least with USDS they have you work a "tour" (like a tour of duty, I guess) which lasts between 3 months and 4 years. First, that's a little ambiguous; who decides the durat…

Representatives have elections to determine how long they can serve; career civil servants have strong protections against firing but the downside is a challenging hiring process that can be very slow.

USDS's willingness to use term hires makes hiring folks in easier, in addition to ensuring that the office doesn't become stagnant.

Re: AI.gov

#215

Post by paulddraper »

jltsiren wrote: post #191
ibejoeb wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is unbridled immigration to the US. I truly can't think of a cohort for which the US is unattractive.

North/West European middle class, for example. I'm from Finland myself, I've been living in the US for some years, and I have no concrete plans to return. I've known many Finns who have tried the same, but most of them have returned to Finland, or at least to Europe. Most of them are highly educated professionals. It turns out the difference in standard of living is not that large. For most people, living closer to f…

Fair enough. I'd hate move an hour away, let alone to another country.

But for anyone that is able/willing to move....

Re: AI.gov

#216

Post by dnate »

rs999gti wrote: post #206
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…

> Plus, I find the whole "pee in a cup" thing demeaning, intrusive and offensive. Marijuana is still US federally illegal.

It is as well in most of europe. And its also illegal to make your employees take a drug test in most of europe unless you work for the police or with heavy machinery

Re: AI.gov

#217

Post by dbish »

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #83
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…

> largely due to the fact that US is relatively permissive towards large income disparities. Actually, its due to a shortage of highly skilled labor/specialists relative to demand. Europe benefits from more advanced math and programming talent as a result of Eastern European and Russian/Ukraine labor availability. US immigration policy puts America at a disadvantage in this regard - something they are weakly trying t…

Don’t you think if this were true there would be more breakout technical (and by extension startup) successes in Europe which doesn’t seem to be the case.

Re: AI.gov

#218

Post by vinhboy »

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…

As someone who used to work in government contracting, this comment is so freaking true.

The whole thing about contractors is so spot on. The only slight difference I would add is that the contractors will NOT hire the best talent, they will hire whoever they can to fill the position, for the cheapest price, so they can claim to have fulfilled their RFP.

It's a dead end.

Re: AI.gov

#219

Post by orochimaaru »

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…

Not to mention that you will have your livelihood at risk because the Congress and President can’t agree on a budget. I’ve considered working for the government. But I’m not willing to put my paycheck in the hands of incompetent elected representatives.

Re: AI.gov

#220

Post by exabrial »

phillipcarter wrote: post #124
exabrial wrote: post #88

How do I not pay for this with my tax dollars?

Good news - you're not, because your tax dollars doesn't pay for much of anything. The US Government has monetary sovereignty and "pays for things" that way.

Then for Christmas, all I want is my gross pay.
Post reply on HN