Slashdot Mirror
Trump is Launching a New Tech Group To 'Transform and Modernize' the US Govt (recode.net)
President Donald Trump announced on Monday he has signed an executive order creating a new technology council to "transfer and modernize" the U.S. government's IT systems. From a report: The gathering is part of a new effort, called the American Technology Council, commissioned by Trump in an executive order signed this morning. The effort seeks to bring leading government officials together with Silicon Valley's top minds in order to "transform and modernize" the aging federal bureaucracy "and how it uses and delivers information." Trump isn't the first sitting U.S. president to look to Silicon Valley in an attempt to bring government into the digital age. His predecessor, former President Barack Obama, similarly launched efforts like the U.S. Digital Service, which the administration billed at the time as a "startup at the White House" that sought to pair tech experts with federal agencies that needed help. Over 20 technology chief executives will attend meetings at the White House in early June to talk about improving government information technology, the report adds.
This will be where they implement the backdoors that aren't....
What happened to Jared (his son-in-law)? I thought he was supposed to be modernizing the government.
I don't respond to AC's.
I worry about government use of modified public cloud services. We should ban government from using pure cloud solutions because the companies can hold the government hostage with the "big off switch". The gov needs to control the DataCenters that run the operations that citizens rely on.
Said the CEO of Oracle: what ya need there is a collection of giant databases...and cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of Microsoft: what ya need there is a PC or MS compatible computing thing on every desk...and cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of Apple: what ya need there is a collection of iThings for instant communication...errr..with the cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of IBM: what ya need there is a Watson AI Cloudy Thingy in every agency...more cloud for every one
etc.
etc.
etc.
The story immediately preceding this one is titled "There's No Good Way To Kill a Bad Idea." I see a theme emerging here, and feel like running for cover. Very fast.
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
Wall
Trump's idea of a "modern government" is medieval: put all your family and friends into key positions as much as possible and hope you can run it like a monarchy. problem is the family has no real qualifications in national or international politics. So this will be fun, fun, fun.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
It is as if millions of COBOL programmers suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Silicon Valley , osftware version, is more about hype and less about production.
We don't need no stinking EPA website. It just confuses people. Too much information.
Let's simplify government!
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
First read that "transform and monetize", maybe that's how the tax cuts get balanced and they'll get a healthcare reform agreement. Make America Freemium Again
Just like fixing healthcare and the tax code revising the entire IT infrastructure for the federal government should be easy right?
I'll just go dust off my Windows 2000 Server book and send them my resume.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
If 1% of the people that voted for Hillary donate $50/month, then every democrat running for congress or the senate in 2018 will get about $1 million.
Hillary outspent Trump about 10-1 and still lost.
So plainly the notion that money is the absolute determinant in politics is false.
Given the Democrats penchant for blowing money or horrifically inept candidates, why would you continue to be such an enabler? What makes you think Democrats will change for the better if you keep funding the corrupt organization of the past, the kind that hand-picked Hilary over Sanders?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actually, I didn't believe in either candidate. (Clinton, more experienced, but not sure it's effective experience) But let's see...Ivaka's qualifications as an "advisor". I can't really find any. Jared? What are his qualifications besides being in the family. Trump himself isn't even a great business person by all accounts. To be clear, I didn't favor either candidate. But this isn't about personal opinion on candidates. Generally I prefer a president to have some experience in international or national politics before being president. Trump was never an elected official. But okay, let's give an untried politician the benefit of the doubt. Academic qualifications, Not really stellar from what I can see. Obama wasn't the best president in history by any stretch of the imagination, but no one can say he wasn't a good speaker or at least moderately educated at the very least. Certainly he refrained from phrases like "very, very badly". Okay, maybe it's Trump speech writers (or maybe he's ignoring his speech writers entirely). He has already violated the constitution in his immigration act, and that is an absolutely historical first in US history. Trump is direct, no question, but subtlety is not his strong suit or knowledge of basic government topics like, say, the constitution, which one generally needs to "Uphold and defend the Constitution of the United states of America. (as per his required oath...which unfortunately he has technically broken. ) I don't think you necessarily need a degree ( Lincoln didn't have one, but he understood the dynamics of government and the people in it ). The understanding of the system into which he's inserted himself is not showing at the moment in my view.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
On Soviet Russia, rug sits on YOU!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Oracle and Apple aren't even in the top 100 technology contractors. IBM and Microsoft are dwarfed by companies a lot of people have never even heard of, CSRA, CACI, SAIC, Harris, etc. Public sector contracting is it's own unique beast and succeeding in Federal contracting requires a unique combination of political prowess and tolerance for bureaucracy and, at times, sheer stupidity that many companies just won't tolerate... or even understand.
These companies are masters at gaming the system and competing against them is very, very tough. I came into Federal contracting through the company I worked for being bought out. I did it for a few years thinking it would be interesting and I could make some sort of a difference. I finally told them to move me to a different office or I was quitting because I couldn't stand it anymore.
Anyway, it doesn't matter whose in office. They've already been doing this and they will continue to do it long after Trump is out of office. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of letting industry get this tightly in bed with the government (specifically the military) in his farewell address and it proved to be very prescient.
Why is everybody's response to a perceived Trump criticism: "something something OBAMA something something!"? It's silly. OmniGeek never said Obama would have done it better. Frankly, I'm not sure OmniGeek even has a problem with Trump's proposal, he just found the juxtaposition humorous.
For the record, I also had the same problem with criticisms of Obama being met with "At least he's not Bush!" That's just lazy rhetoric.
Can you name and quote any "credentialed and qualified" person who has stated that Syria has moderate rebels who are positioned to turn Syria into anything remotely like Switzerland?
Because if there's one thing I've noticed about the alt-right, it's that it's really easy for them to make up straw men to ridicule the viewpoints of their political opponents than it is to actually address what their opponents are actually saying.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
"Transforming" the government is something a bunch of Silicon Valley executives could no doubt accomplish. The problem is that "transformed" isn't necessary "better".
Facebook has transformed peoples' lives, to the point it's regarded indispensable for many. It hasn't really made their lives better.
"Transformation" is a goal without a point of view; and blank screen on which anyone is free to imagine whatever colors he likes. Not like "cheaper". Cheaper is quite concrete. "More responsive" would be harder to measure than cheaper, but at least it represents something.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
So we have to get very, very tough on cyber and cyber warfare. It is a, it is a huge problem. I have a son.
He's 10 years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers, it's unbelievable. The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it's hardly do-able. But I will say, we are not doing the job we should be doing, but that's true throughout our whole governmental society.
What a fucking moron.
- Vincit qui patitur.
There are moderate rebels in Syria. Or at least, there were. There was a sizable Syrian rebel force that was fighting to create a secular state and thought ISIS and AQ were both backwards rednecks. Unfortunately, there were more AQ and ISIS guys with more guns and support and basically executed the leaders and outspoken proponents of that ideology. The remainder are still out there, but in a much more reduced role.
Source: I have lots of Syrian Moderate Muslims friends who were sending much material and monetary support to these groups before they were destroyed.
appropriate use... finally
Uh, "Transform and Modernize", or "Transfer and Monetize"?
-- "Oh. This guy again."
To modernize Federal IT, one must first find money to modernize Federal IT, then one must make broad, sweeping changes to Federal procurement rules.
I don't see either of those happening. If they do, I don't see the second ending at all well.
Finding God in a Dog
To be clear, most "transform" or "modernize" efforts, regardless of the political faction that launched them, and regardless of their innate merit, seem to run aground somewhere around halfway through when they start impinging on the interests of powerful political or institutional constituencies. Those that get through to the point of concrete proposals or final reports tend to be sent off to die of neglect in a legislative subcommittee.
In the case of Trump's proposals, I think this will be a good thing, as the guiding principle of this administration (inasmuch as there can be said to be ANY principles at work there) seems to be to turn everything upside down, regardless of its actual merit, and break it all into the smallest bits imaginable, doing as much damage as humanly possible along the way. There's no other reasonable way (aside from simple corruption and self-serving pillaging) to interpret such actions as putting a climate-change denier in charge of the EPA and an enemy of public education in charge of the Department of Education.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: Trump and his friends will do enormous damage to the country while failing to bring back the promised Golden Age.
Yes, I do find the juxtaposition humorous; in dark times, we look for humor where we can find it.
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
Trump will modernize government the same way his sons have modernized African wildlife.
You are welcome on my lawn.
That should have been a comment to https://slashdot.org/story/17/...
You don't get actual solutions by relying on "experts" that want to sell you something. Especially billions of dollars of something. You hire experts to assess the solutions put forward by vendors.
Did anything good come out of the committee organized by Obama? or Bush? or Clinton?
And modernize the ignorance! Cool initiative, indeed.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Congress has to fund it.
The president has to ACTUALLY staff it. Mr. Trump still has THOUSANDS of jobs STILL unstaffed. He can't implement policy. It's like walmart can't restock produce shelves because they cut staffing levels too low.
It's like Mr. Trump is talking to empty chairs (sort of like Clint Eastwood), giving them orders, smiling and looking proud. But empty chairs can't implement his policies.
His incompetence is the only thing making his presidency remotely bearable.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
If POTUS were to set up such a group within the government, the Democrats would be able to forum-shop for some municipal night court judge to kill it in its crib.
And I quote:
So we have to get very, very tough on cyber and cyber warfare. It is a, it is a huge problem. I have a son.
He's 10 years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers, it's unbelievable. The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it's hardly do-able. But I will say, we are not doing the job we should be doing, but that's true throughout our whole governmental society.
What a fucking moron.
Now you've got me curious ..... what does Trump have wrong there, specifically? Are you claiming that the Federal government does it right? (Despite the repeated break-ins and theft of government documents from multiple agencies regularly covered on Slashdot?)
Or don't you like his wording?
Or is this just an expression of your anger and rejection of Trump as president for beating the entitled candidate that "should have" won?
Do you just prefer the redundant failure modes that Hillary and her campaign created for their IT because that is the "smart" thing to do and the obvious model to use for the Federal government?
+5 "insightful" in this case ~= "shared spite" - You have lots of company.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I voted for Trump, but would have voted for Sanders had he been running.
What could the press possibly put up on Sanders than was worse than they put up about Trump? Not that they would have anyway, Sanders would have been untouched by the press.
But on top of that Sanders had no stench or corporations, of dishonesty, or just downright inhumanity that the Clintons have worked hard to obtain over decades. Sanders would have been the rational sane choice compared to Trump, but as it was you had Trump and the even more insane and corrupt choice of Hillary. Literally ANY other Democrat would have won over Trump (certainly Biden would have).
The Democrats are screwed now though because Trump will be normalized over four years, and the DNC shows no sign of moving towards any kind of sanity or popularity. The next election Trump will win by quite a large margin, even if they do manage to convince Biden to run (I don't think Sanders would be able to beat an already president Trump).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That is some horribly inept analysis. Hillary won the popular vote and lost the electoral college by a rounding error.
That is some horribly inept math. Clinton had 232 electoral votes, Trump had 304. 304 - 232 = 72, that is a pretty large round number and pretty far from a "rounding error". That is a massive electoral victory that showed how screwed Clinton was, a few more states could have swung her way and she still would have lost.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's true. Facts _are_ flamebait to liberals.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I can't decide if he's a bull in a china shop, unwittingly making a mess of things, or the kids in that short story, The Destructors.
When the oversight is from, by a mentally disturbed human that can barely read and speak above a 6th grade level. How could that possibly work to the American peoples benefit.