91–100 of 218 posts
Bit of a sparse article. The near-miss of CVE funding is certainly tragic, but there's no mention of how they siphoned data from the NLRB and locked everyone out of their accounts, and give only a quick mention to cutting federal grants for cybersecurity and CISA's funding. There's a lot more ammo out there to show how incompetent the Trump administration and Musk's DOGE team actually is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It saves money on the government budget... or so they think. I doubt that there's anything sinister going on. It's just numbers in a government spreadsheet, and the Trump administration sees money going to projects that benefit people outside the US, regardless of their internal value, and just assumes that it's the US money spend on other nations. They are not smart enough, well informed enough, nor do they particul…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be doing a cost/benefit analysis. The sense we have is that the people doing the dismantling either have not done such an analysis or are at the very least keeping it from the public.
In my country such things are discussed in parliament during endless sessions about the yearly budget. They are not decreed by a god emperor at a whim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So in what way does this help the American people? Shutting down Mitre and the CVE is against American interests, both public and private. That said, you can make an argument, one that revolves around cost (was the CVE DB worth $50M a year, especially given its backlog?). The other part of that argument rests on assuming there will be a private or semi-private replacement for the service, that there may be many of t…
>$50M does seem like a lot $50 seems like nothing for a trillion dollar government budget.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't. It's a side-effect of the populist right's "human capital" problem. Lots of nefarious theories abound about how this will be used to clamp down on our rights, and that may ultimately happen, but that will merely be a reaction to the consequences of their blundering actions. Today, the conventional wisdom among the Trump administration is these cybersecurity programs are a waste of money and that magically…
Those who cause the crisis will show up soon to sell the solution, in the form of private ventures that make them a lot of money. This mirrors a lot the physical destruction of other countries only to come back for "reconstruction" which filled some pockets with unimaginable amounts of money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Evoking Hanlon's razor: The first Trump admin was mostly just incompetent. The second is in many ways much more incompetent, but now it is also actively malicious.
Bit of a sparse article. The near-miss of CVE funding is certainly tragic, but there's no mention of how they siphoned data from the NLRB and locked everyone out of their accounts, and give only a quick mention to cutting federal grants for cybersecurity and CISA's funding. There's a lot more ammo out there to show how incompetent the Trump administration and Musk's DOGE team actually is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my country such things are discussed in parliament during endless sessions about the yearly budget. They are not decreed by a god emperor at a whim.
I find this hard to believe. Every country has various conditions and scenarios where the leader is granted god-like powers. ex: In Canada Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act for the first time ever during covid. My understanding is that it was intended for 9/11-type actions, not protesters who should have been arrested weeks earlier. What country are you in?
But yes, the intent is for events that threaten the nation, not protests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So in what way does this help the American people? Shutting down Mitre and the CVE is against American interests, both public and private. That said, you can make an argument, one that revolves around cost (was the CVE DB worth $50M a year, especially given its backlog?). The other part of that argument rests on assuming there will be a private or semi-private replacement for the service, that there may be many of t…
> there will be a private or semi-private replacement for the service It would, by definition as a for-profit entity, cost more and provide less value. That is a guarantee.