Software industry is now filled with maga supporters
A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
221–230 of 404 posts
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#222Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#223Works created by U.S. federal government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain, according to 17 U.S.C. § 105, except for classified or restricted information (but none of what he posted is classified or restricted)
This is a ridiculous statement. The US Government (or any government) has processes to publish data so that it is well vetted and understood. Some script kiddie isn't allowed to just post things in public on his own.
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#224A surprisingly large amount of data one might think is classified is not at all. In this case all the examples listed are from freely available public data outside of the Twitter thing which seems to be just setting up the environment for some local tool. Here are the sites: --- datacatalog.worldbank.org opendata.arcgis.com mrdata.usgs.gov / www.usgs.gov --- Sharing things like this isn't very useful because it just…
Not even data, html snippets with links to publicly available data.
Watch at the media turns this into “doge bros mapping top secret minerals” and “doge has access to all our DMs!”
For those who hate Trump but know what the you are looking at in the screenshots keep this one in mind. The media hates you and their goal is to sow division
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#225[flagged]
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
“Bozo” is pretty lightweight for someone actively trying to destroy the foundations of this country’s government and democratic policies.
I feel they are actively shoring up the country’s foundations. For decades, since the Church committee in the 1970s and under Vice President Gore’s Reinventing Government initiative (which IIRC resulted in the removal of 100,000 government employees), disclosure of questionable or hidden programs was a core progressive value.
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
So undermining national security by leaking oddly specific and contemporary critical infrastructure data is just "draining the swamp"? Interesting how "routing the permanent bureaucracy" conveniently includes actions that benefit foreign adversaries. Funny how Conservative principles now include strategic incompetence at the exact points that serve Russian interests.
What was leaked? It was all publicly available datasets?
I guess the leakers didn’t know that! :D
What can you do? Those DOGE staffers are young and inexperienced.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#228Works created by U.S. federal government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain, according to 17 U.S.C. § 105, except for classified or restricted information (but none of what he posted is classified or restricted)
> U.S. federal government employees as part of their official duties “Official duties” is load bearing in this sentence. If the work is found to have been improperly authorised, this DOGE bro is acting in his personal capacity. That means personal liability for his actions and lawbreaking.
I think it’s pretty hard to show an employee is not acting in an official duty in regards to work material. I don’t think this is a sound legal opinion.
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#229Works created by U.S. federal government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain, according to 17 U.S.C. § 105, except for classified or restricted information (but none of what he posted is classified or restricted)
Implying that DOGE bozo is law-compliant while breaking laws and destroying trust is...humor too soon?
What functional, diplomatic purpose exists for calling him a "bozo"? What problems does this solve? Which tensions does this ease? Which conflicts does this stop? What sensitive government data does this un-leak? Which broken laws does this adjudicate? What usurped power is being brought back under control with this?
Or is it just contributing to a one-way ratchet that only ever increases partisan polarization and hostility for no reason at all, instead of seeking to de-escalate and solve problems?
P.S. this goes for Trump/Musk/DOGE supporters too. Name calling and vindictive personal attacks aren't decreasing the deficit, they're not paying off the debt, they're not reducing weaponization of government against conservatives, they're doing nothing to address border and immigration concerns, and they aren't reducing crime. So I ask you, too, what problems are being solved with vindictive, spiteful namecalling?
Re: A DOGE staffer appears to be posting DOGE work on his public GitHub
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Succeed at what? For example, they canceled invasive species control programs for the Great Lakes. Is it a success that they saved a modest amount of money, while letting the condition of the lakes further erode?
Source? The only news I’ve heard is that they fired 12 of 85 staffers and prohibited hiring seasonal workers, which was then rescinded a few days later. https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/03/federal-firings-coul... Not to attack you personally, but I’ve noticed there is a lot of hyperbole here based on dramatic headlines, extrapolation based on feeling rather than facts, so important but difficult to stay informed.
Where's the hyperbole you're complaining about?
The comment you're responding to says "...while letting the condition of the lakes further erode", which the article you linked to supports.
> ...extrapolation based on feeling rather than facts...
12 of 85 is a fact. It's basic logic to estimate the effect of this.
The administrator in the best position to understand the impact of this has provided an analysis: "Cutting back the control program by one-sixth would allow over one million lamprey to survive, McClinchey estimated. Those lampreys would eat nearly 5 million pounds of fish, equalling $105 million in lost economic output and potential, far outstripping the cost of the workers’ salaries."
What's your basis for dismissing this as feelings? It appears irrational.