If I can hijack the thread a bit for a related question -- does anyone know of an easy selfhosted non-macOS server that will periodically pull full backups from iOS devices over Wifi (with the user's authorization on-device)? I think there's a lot of FOSS ground work for doing it on Linux, but hard to find good information about how to put it all together into a reliable automated solution, and sadly I don't really have the energy right now or dozens of hours to put into it.
I might even pay ~$100. I want it on Linux, but if it's under my control and reliable, maybe I could do Windows or macOS. Maybe I should just install iTunes on Windows in a VM...
> Almost all fluoride from the drinking water does not have any effect on tooth enamel, because it has contact with it only for a few seconds
The contact via toothpaste or mouth wash isn’t all that much longer, so why would they be effective if fluoridated water isn’t? People intentionally wash out toothpaste and mouthwash after this short contact.
It's your copy of the message. I'm not a lawyer, but I think if a copyright owner gives you a copy of their work, the law doesn't entitle them to take it back or rewrite it. A license agreement might, but nobody writes or signs those to cover text messages.
I think a more useful way to analyze this is that a message, when it is sent to you, is not serving the purpose of a copyright work. So copyright should not really be the lens through which we analyze this.
Copyright isn't the entire point though. If someone says: I'm going to kill your husband in a text. Your husband is murdered, and you take your phone to the police, is that text still going to be there?
> BTW, I keep reading and hearing derogative terms like "script kiddies" and "20 year olds". What's happened to diversity and inclusion? So, they have to be of a certain age? What's the magical age? And, do they have to come from the same place that created the problems as well? This isn't sensible at all.
I don't support DOGE, but I have also wondered if all the roasting them for being young is fair. For now I landed on yes, it's a fair criticism -- these people are too young to be put in control of massive agencies that have been running for decades. If you believe they can make the right choice because it's so obvious, it seems like we may as well just fire everyone, and then we can save the time and expense of even having DOGE. It is not logical IMO to say that some discretion is needed but also unelected 20-year-olds have enough discretion.
Re "script kiddies": the term is a bit rude maybe. But given it means an unskilled programmer who is only barely able to use programs written by others, then yes, it is fair to criticize these DOGE people, whose primary qualification was supposedly being really smart programmers, if they don't appear to meet the mark. (I'm not taking a position on whether it's factual that they are unskilled, but simply whether a "script kiddie" belongs at a helm of the government.)
Regarding what's the right age, I think of Constitutional age limits and Congressional confirmations -- those are the ways we normally have to make sure people are old enough to work in the government. But the side that's been harping about "unelected bureaucrats" is now making the most powerful bureaucrats ever, not subject to election, legal qualifications, or Congressional oversight. Hmm.
> do they have to come from the same place that created the problems as well? This isn't sensible at all.
Well, no, but I have the impression the place they are coming from is "likes right-wing tech leaders like Elon Musk and has worked for them before." I'm not going to dig into investigating or presenting that now, but if it's true, then it's not sensible either. Even under a more charitable characterization of who they are, I don't think engineers, PMs, or MBAs are going to rapidly fix agencies that have been operating in a different sphere and scale. If they went at a more careful pace than DOGE has been doing, I might have more trust they would solve problems.
Suspected by Elon Musk, with no factual basis presented. Here's some real facts:
> ...22 of the 24 agencies covered by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act) had some data on instances of time and attendance
misconduct—including potential fraud—from fiscal years 2015 through 2019... Most (19 of 24) agency Inspectors General (IG) reported that they substantiated
five or fewer allegations of time and attendance misconduct or fraud over the
5-year period. In total, these IGs substantiated 100 allegations, ranging from zero
substantiated allegations at six agencies to more than 10 at four agencies.
Do they think there is somebody out there making millions on fake federal paychecks? They should go find and prosecute them! Hopefully such a criminal is not smart enough to monitor the email accounts and respond, or DOGE's brilliant plan will be foiled.
These quotes support the existence of the emails, which people here aren't disputing. They say nothing about whether the only layoffs were those who didn't respond, which was implied by your original statement that "the people let go were unable or unwilling to send an email listing 5 things they accomplished in the last week."
TFA: “After thousands of government layoffs, the Office of Personnel Management on Saturday directed federal workers to email a list of roughly five accomplishments”
I was incorrect, and you are right about the order of events in this case, although I don't believe TFA says these 18F employees didn't reply to the email. I noted in an edit that I accidentally pulled a quote from a different article. I believe the gist of what I and others are saying here is still true.
Some other points:
* The second email came "late Friday" and the layoffs happened hours later at 1 am on Saturday, so it's not reasonable to count the second email as a warning or genuine attempt to find the "good" employees. I'm guessing it was just blasted out and happened to land in their inboxes before the firing notice did.
* Based on https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/01/general-services-ad... it appears the entire 18F unit was cut, so this doesn't seem targeted or predicated on email responses. Also, I'm not a leader, but if 100% of my organization didn't comply with an order, cutting them all is probably a much less effective decision than trying to meet them half-way. I guess if they've truly been doing nothing for years, there would be no loss, but that seems unlikely to be true in most cases including 18F's.
* Your initial comment appeared to be speaking generally on DOGE cuts, so it is fair for us to be responding accordingly. 18F seems to have been pretty small, but part of the reason this story is interesting is everything else DOGE is doing. As we've said, plenty of cuts happened before and independent of any email. Personally I'm doubtful that responding does much, but I'd be interested in any reporting on employee's experiences or what DOGE is saying about responses and how it affects their decisions.
Like I said above, I don't think TFA mentioned 18F's responses and there's not really a good reason to assume that the layoffs were due to no response.
I had to Wikipedia the memorandum to even know what it was, but wasn't Obama president in 2014 when Russia first breached it? Asking honestly, was that not a crucial failure but Biden's response (or lack of one) in 2022 was crucial?
Yes, I consider Obama to also be to blame somewhat. But in practice, the situation with the 2014 invasion was a lot more complex to respond to. Russia quite successfully obscured their involvement in the first couple of days...all signs pointed to Russia but they denied involvement and the little green men wore no Russian insignia, so it could have just as easily been framed as internal separatist activity, which was the Russian intent. It actually took a couple of weeks before it was crystal clear that Russia was behind everything. By then, Crimea was already occupied.
The war in Donbas was only a little bit more clear. Even though Russia's fingerprints were all over every action there, there was also no doubt that there was significant Ukrainian separatist activity, and even the most resolute of allies will hesitate to defend their allies from separatist activity.
With Biden, we saw the buildup, knew it was going to happen, and had been warning Ukraine that it was going to happen. We saw it for what it was on day one without any equivocation. We just did nothing about it.
Yes, Obama also bears a lot of the blame for this. If US reacted properly back in 2014 (or at any later point before 2022), the 2022 invasion wouldn't have happened.
Bringing up Palantir is funny to me. I don’t know enough gossip on Musk and Thiel’s relationship, but if I did I would bet it would solely determine the outcome of a hypothetical DOGE investigation into Palantir contracts. It seems from a sibling comment I’m not alone. If we’re right, DOGE isn’t going to eliminate government waste and corruption, just move it around.
We’re not gaslit into thinking everything was fine with government spending, we’re angry that this is how they’re going to “fix” it.
I think for many people, this is the first exposure to audits and spending reduction in govt. So judging on an absolute scale, yeah DOGE is not doing a great job.
Judging on a relative scale to past attempts and the existing 5(!) agencies with the sole purpose of auditing and reducing spending, DOGE looks amazing and has gotten farther in 1 month than everyone else combined over 20 years.
It is an immensely difficult undertaking and the bureaucracy will struggle, writhe, and set fire to everything around it before it can be put down. We should hope that DOGE is just getting started and picking up momentum rather than having settled.
So what you're saying is that "waste reduction" is such a holy goal that the means justify the ends? Not matter the consequences, no matter the outcomes, no matter the harm.
I think that's where we fundemtally disagree, not to mention your blindness to their stated ideological ulterior motives. Thr Project 2025 document explicitly states it's goal of ultimately replacing federal workers with its cadres that work towards to it's political project.
I'd like to be proven wrong but I have a feeling all of this will never provide any cost benefits to those that aren't the rich. Even if they somehow manage to reduce the taxes on the avg joe, a big if, the Joe will pay for it in other tangible ways. I.e. I don't think it's waste being eliminated but projects the administration disagrees or wants to privatize. Can you address these concerns?
> the bureaucracy will struggle, writhe, and set fire to everything around it before it can be put down
Convenient way to blame "the bureaucracy" for every problem that DOGE creates. Are you open to the possibility that DOGE will cause more problems than it fixes?
I might even pay ~$100. I want it on Linux, but if it's under my control and reliable, maybe I could do Windows or macOS. Maybe I should just install iTunes on Windows in a VM...