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

US Tech Force

techforce.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 320 posts

Re: US Tech Force

#61

Post by mandevil »

verst wrote: post #23

How is this different from 18F (a group within GSA which Elon killed), US Digital Service (which Elon kind of converted to DOGE) or Defense Digital Service (DDS)? Is the only difference that the current government can claim they started this (completely ignoring they dismantled the previous programs)?

Something often observed in authoritarian states is duplication of effort because of empire building. The ruler cannot trust any of his underlings- they are all sucking up to him and backstabbing each other constantly, so he pits them against each other, assigning overlapping responsibilities on purpose to keep any one subordinate from becoming too strong. This is why all of the "fascism/communism is so efficient" arguments need to actually look at the nature of Soviet or Nazi governments. As an example, there were at least five completely separate armed ground forces in Nazi Germany (1).

This constant competition between parts of the government actually led to tremendous waste. You can see it again in the Soviet space program during the 1960's. While NASA had a single purpose of getting to the moon before 1971 with a unified organization under the control of a single leader, after Khrushchev was deposed (and Korolev died) the Soviet space program splintered into a war between the old OKB-1 (Korolev's group) and Chelomei's OKB-52 that lasted for twenty years over Super-Proton vs Energia etc.

1: The Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS are the two most famous, but the Luftwaffe recruited, trained and equipped the Fallschirm-Panzer Korps and Fallshchirmjaeger- yes, German paratroops worked for Goering not the Wehrmacht. There were also five Marine Infantry Divisions under the Navy- they had half as many Marine Divisions as the US did, despite many fewer amphibious assaults! And the Volksturm, at the end of the war when things looked grim for Nazi Germany, was under NSDAP party control but separate from the Waffen-SS.

Re: US Tech Force

#62

Post by quantified »

afavour wrote: post #29

> Tech Force will primarily recruit early-career technologists > Tech Force will include centralized organization and programming and serve as a recruiting platform post-employment. Be prepared to struggle at the end of your two year placement because you have no idea how this is going to look on your resume two years from now. Maybe it’ll have the gravitas of having worked at the former USDS. But maybe it’ll be the…

Coinbase will probably look quite favorably that you have been on the inside of whatever their piece is.

Re: US Tech Force

#63

Post by quantified »

afavour wrote: post #53
redbluered wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employers would have to be pretty spiteful to look at it the way you purposed. I wouldn't want a spiteful employer. The flip side is that a lot of government jobs lead to pretty good private sector opportunities working with those same agencies. If you want to contact to DOE, knowing how it works in the inside and knowing people there definitely helps. A lot of military contractors are former military. Who better to…

> Employers would have to be pretty spiteful to look at it the way you purposed I disagree. If a persons resume contains description of blatantly harmful work how else can I interpret it but negatively? At best you’d have to chalk it up to “just following orders” but I don’t want blind obedience in a prospective employee either. The destruction caused by DOGE is evident to anyone with eyes, as is the agency’s complet…

These employees will be hired by the companies they helped integrate. Not a single one will look on them poorly. They will have domain knowledge, turf knowledge, and they won't argue about working with MAGA for money.

Re: US Tech Force

#65

Post by reaperducer »

b0sk wrote: post #12

This is not a political appointment, but if you have mentioned something even mildly negative about a certain person in the past, not only we'll walk you out, we'll probably arrest you!

Also, try not to be brown.

Re: US Tech Force

#66

Post by reaperducer »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #16
smallnix wrote: post #14

> at the Department of Defense *Department of War

Oddly, one of the FAQs does call it the Department of War.

Oddly, one of the FAQs does call it the Department of War.

Not odd at all. That's what it's called now. Complete with new URL:

https://www.war.gov

Re: US Tech Force

#67

Post by afavour »

quantified wrote: post #63
afavour wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Employers would have to be pretty spiteful to look at it the way you purposed I disagree. If a persons resume contains description of blatantly harmful work how else can I interpret it but negatively? At best you’d have to chalk it up to “just following orders” but I don’t want blind obedience in a prospective employee either. The destruction caused by DOGE is evident to anyone with eyes, as is the agency’s complet…

These employees will be hired by the companies they helped integrate. Not a single one will look on them poorly. They will have domain knowledge, turf knowledge, and they won't argue about working with MAGA for money.

Embracing MAGA on your resume can pay dividends when they’re in power. Perhaps less so once the tide (inevitably) turns. There’s a reason a lot of gov tech folks deliberately paint themselves as non partisan.

Re: US Tech Force

#69

Post by embedding-shape »

tptacek wrote: post #41
embedding-shape wrote: post #27

> Participants will work on high-impact technology initiatives including AI implementation, application development, data modernization, and digital service delivery across federal agencies. > The initial roster of private sector partners includes Adobe, Amazon Web Services, AMD, Anduril, Apple, Box, C3.ai, Coinbase, Databricks, Dell Technologies, Docusign, Google Public Sector, IBM, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI,…

This is a thing you can only say if you know very little about the talent pipeline for actual espionage technology in the USG, which: they do not have a lot of problems there. Lots of people don't share your precise values about espionage or about espionage technology, and the real jobs in this field are extremely high-status. There's competition to get them.

> This is a thing you can only say if you know very little about the talent pipeline for actual espionage technology in the USG

Or something one might want to say if they want to still have plausible deniability about not having been there, yet still want to say something. Who knows.

Re: US Tech Force

#70

Post by tptacek »

embedding-shape wrote: post #69
tptacek wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a thing you can only say if you know very little about the talent pipeline for actual espionage technology in the USG, which: they do not have a lot of problems there. Lots of people don't share your precise values about espionage or about espionage technology, and the real jobs in this field are extremely high-status. There's competition to get them.

> This is a thing you can only say if you know very little about the talent pipeline for actual espionage technology in the USG Or something one might want to say if they want to still have plausible deniability about not having been there, yet still want to say something. Who knows.

The USG does not want plausible deniability about this. They actively recruit on elite engineering campuses over it. It is super fucking interesting work and candidates compete for the opportunity to do it. If you think otherwise, you're in a filter bubble.
Post reply on HN