Howdy Matt - will you build a Muslim registry if Trump orders it or Congress passes it?
[deleted]
Staying with the US Digital Service
91–100 of 251 posts
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
You state this as simple fact, but is it so? Delivering enterprise software is very hard. Matt suggests that USDS was necessary to rescue healthcare.gov, for example. The labor pool of skilled coders is smaller vs. demand than for many other professions. If the top 500 coders declined to participate in a project that savagely violates human rights - and encouraged this as a norm in our communities - isn't it plausibl…
> If the top 500 coders declined to participate in a project that savagely violates human rights - and encouraged this as a norm in our communities - isn't it plausible that doing so could either prevent, derail, or meaningfully weaken such a project? Not sure what the top 500 vote totals were on this, but when Snowden's documents revealed existence of a massive domestic surveillance program that included large amoun…
That's why we need to more specifically show where software crosses ethical boundaries. With these NSA programs, I can easily see how you can work on them and never actually realise how bad what you're doing is – especially if your work followed a progressions.
Also, I can't resist, but:
> Worth noting that it was developed without any significant leaks either
...until is wasn't
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's the thing, bub. A person who has put so much effort into just hinting he'd like one[0] while making sure he can also claim not to want one is just a scumbag, not someone who has never proposed or supported one. It's like saying "I don't really think all blue people are liars" and giving a big wink to your audience at the same time, then claiming to not be a racist. Are supporters of someone like that suckers o…
> Are supporters of someone like that suckers or just being dishonest about their own intentions? As long as we're drawing comparisons, isn't your question a bit like "Have you quit beating your wife?"
Rather than sophistry, it might be more productive to supply a third explanation for why someone would try and claim Trump hasn't worked hard to give the impression he wants a Muslim registry?
Bonus points if you can explain the massive cognitive dissonance between supporting a man who goes out of his way to muddy the waters where his plans and opinions are concerned, and the gnashing of teeth about Clinton's admittance that it can be useful to have a public and private stance.
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#94> Working for the government doesn’t pay as well as a big company in Silicon Valley. We don’t get any free lunches. Many days are incredibly frustrating. All I can tell you is that the work is deeply important and inspiring, and you have a chance to work on things that genuinely make peoples’ lives better. Pretty easy thing to say when you already have millions in your bank account.
I don't think Matt was speaking to his personal decision alone, as much as making a transparent recruiting pitch.
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely you have evidence of this?
Sure. The program has a name. It is called NSEERS. The info about it is all available publicly.
The statements of candidate Trump suggested a system far broader in scope than NSEERS to cover US citizens. The Kobach plan to reinstate NSEERS (it was halted in 2011) would presumably involve more invasive point of entry procedures for more countries.
Whichever way it is, the real time to stop NSEERS was when it started in 2002. Since that didn't happen, it didn't stop until 2011. So yes, it is a good time to complain about religious profiling when a new administration is planning to institute it.
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Speaking of Russia (which is the only one of those countries/localities that I can speak for, since I grew up there), I will say that Putin is inarguably the best thing that happened to Russia in the past 100 years.
Even better than Stalin? Or was your use of the word "inarguably" some kind of code?
Even though most people in the US don't understand why, Putin is really liked in Russia.
I guess those same people will have a lesson on what it's like to have a leader most of the world doesn't like/respect/understand :)
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#97Very inspiring to learn about US Digital Service. I wished somehow Germany would have something similar.
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure why this was downvoted. It's a very valid question considering the times we live in.
if not this person, someone else will. so it just boils down to asking what his personal political views are.
> if not this person, someone
> else will
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a question that has no easy answer. In the U.S., the decision to go to war is made by civilians: the President and (ideally) Congress. Below the President, the top military decision-maker/administrator -- Secretary of Defense -- is also a civilian. All the people in the country could sign up and join the military and yet have no authority to actually go to war. But I'm not naive: the decision to go to war is m…
> Making the military more smoothly administered does not necessarily correlate with an increase in horrors of war. Certainly making enlistment harder will decrease the number of troops (absent a draft) which has a non-zero probability of decreasing military adventurism, yes? Discouraging a single enlistment seems to me like it has the same order-of-magnitude impact as casting a single vote. > If the military attract…
The military is getting a few more recruits than they need, so they are turning a few away. Discouraging enlistment would therefore not change the troop size until you get to a certain number.
Until then, you'd be tightening the freedom of the military to turn people away, which means lowered standards. There is a case to be made that you want the best possible people to join the military. Because you need a certain level of intelligence and moral integrity to, for example, refuse unlawful orders.
In fact, that mechanism used to be the top argument for the draft in my country (Germany). "Pacifists make the best soldiers" so-to-speak (although pacifists were in reality exempt from service).
Re: Staying with the US Digital Service
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that no "Muslim Registry" has ever been proposed or supported by anyone it is not the most pressing question.
Here's the thing, bub. A person who has put so much effort into just hinting he'd like one[0] while making sure he can also claim not to want one is just a scumbag, not someone who has never proposed or supported one. It's like saying "I don't really think all blue people are liars" and giving a big wink to your audience at the same time, then claiming to not be a racist. Are supporters of someone like that suckers o…
Bub? C'mon now. No need for that.