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

The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

sightlessscribbles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 510 posts

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#371

Post by gosub100 »

palmotea wrote: post #328
gosub100 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I do with telemarketer scammers. I have no limit of depravity that I draw from in attempt to offend them. No limits. And exactly for the reasons you describe. Get them to crack and quit the company.

> This is exactly what I do with telemarketer scammers. I have no limit of depravity that I draw from in attempt to offend them. No limits. And exactly for the reasons you describe. Get them to crack and quit the company. Have you heard of pig butchering? Sometimes the "scammer" you're talking to is practically a slave that will be beaten if they don't hit their numbers: https://www.wired.com/story/the-red-bull-leaks…

That seems like a problem for the telcos to resolve. I.e. don't allow calls from nations that do this.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#372

Post by [deleted] »

create_accounts wrote: post #217
tyingq wrote: post #18

Sounds like it's not real but... It reads like an indictment of the government employee personally, rather than the rules and constraints that employee is forced to use. Probably fair to comment on the interaction, whether the person was rude, and so on. But blaming them for not accepting email is kind of silly. They are not empowered to do that kind of thing.

I hate it when bureaucrats ask me to send e-mails because they are not encrypted. Specially my ID. It's a security risk, indeed

[deleted]

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#373

Post by cdcarter »

elephanlemon wrote: post #292
perching_aix wrote: post #270

I found this story very surprising in a number of ways, so I gave some of the details a quick search. According to the docs linked, there are two forms at play, SSA-454 and SSA-455. The author likely had to have an SSA-455 filled, as his condition is of a "Medical Improvement Not Expected" type (this differentiation does exist). Seems that this needs to be done every 5-7 years. Both can be filled online apparently th…

The entire blog is probably generated by OpenClawd or the like. I don’t think it’s a real story.

The blog started publishing in 2017. Why do you think this?

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#374

Post by michaelkeenan »

jaggederest wrote: post #222
RobotToaster wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are curable disabilities. True, but it should be obvious in 99% of cases if a condition is lifelong. >And what's curable changes along with the advance of technology. Very rarely tbh. I can't think of a single lifelong condition that was cured in the last decade. Even then it should be trivial to only review cases when a cure is available, by searching the database for people with that condition.

Hepatitis C has effectively been cured. Obesity, sickle cell, and cystic fibrosis have all heard their death knell though not a complete cure. Hep C regimens are getting closer and closer to "take a pill for a couple months" - no more interferon injections or multiple rounds of multiple drugs. Trikafta is a functional cure for 90% of CF patients, I believe - not easy or cheap but normalizes what you care about bar th…

Great list!

There's also Leber congenital amaurosis, a form of blindness that now has a (very expensive) gene therapy: https://www.wgbh.org/news/2017-10-12/fda-panel-endorses-gene...

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#375

Post by theK »

ryandrake wrote: post #348
theK wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what is the argument here? That it is irrelevant because there is no critical mass? Do you think the French revolution happened in isolation?

The French Revolution didn't just happen spontaneously from individuals acting individually. You need leadership and coordinated action to change things. A small number of individuals acting individually, yet pushing in the same direction, will never move a needle.

Exactly my point. All that (and all the other things needed) did not just materialize out of thin air. It took decades and dozens of failed protests to get to that point.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#376

Post by kstrauser »

apical_dendrite wrote: post #366
kstrauser wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s kinda true, but adds a few steps over cmd-P “print to fax”, paste in a phone number, done. And when done, the fax workflow has been tested and approved in courts. It’s a known entity. I don’t love faxes. This isn’t me saying we should keep them forever. We shouldn’t. Still, there are reasons they’re still widely used for medical stuff today. If CMS or HHS rolled out a new method and told doctor’s offices to st…

We still deal with doctors who handwrite their progress notes. Fax will be around for a very, very long time.

Well, that too.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#378

Post by gowld »

This reads like LLM slop. gptzero says 98%.

It also appears to be a confession of intentional vandalism of government property, despite the author admitting that they already knew how to send a fax via website, which is as convenient as email.

And, believe it or not, yes, some people do in fact receive treatment that cures a disability.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#379

Post by watwut »

GlenTheMachine wrote: post #356
tyingq wrote: post #18

Sounds like it's not real but... It reads like an indictment of the government employee personally, rather than the rules and constraints that employee is forced to use. Probably fair to comment on the interaction, whether the person was rude, and so on. But blaming them for not accepting email is kind of silly. They are not empowered to do that kind of thing.

“ It reads like an indictment of the government employee personally” As a government employee: it often is the employee personally. Not always, but surprisingly often. There is a type of mid-level bureaucrat who just can’t be bothered to make anyone else’s life easier, even if they can. It’s just easier not to, and over time that becomes its own form of malice. The tales I could tell you about security officers basic…

But we do NOT want random government employs accepting data in random format by email they just decided that are safe and non-executable. It is not like the admin lady in the office got an extensive training about what can be done with pdf, xls, usb stick, txt and what not.

They just have no idea. From this woman point of view, pdf in email is as safe as usb stick in a an envelope.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#380

Post by kstrauser »

bigbuppo wrote: post #353
kstrauser wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a current requirement. (Source: I'm adjacent to a doctor's office.) Two big advantages of faxes are that 1) they're point-to-point, and 2) there's zero caching between the sender and receiver. If everyone had a fax machine such that you'd commonly get a working fax receiver if you mis-entered the recipient's number, then #1 wouldn't be such a big deal. But in reality, if you enter a fax number, and the other end…

That's a very 1993 understanding of telecommunications.

Possibly! I haven’t used my Verizon CO badge to work on telco equipment in a few years. How is it fundamentally different now so that my brief description is wrong? I like to learn new stuff!
Post reply on HN