In fairness the SECWAR is hardly a computing expert.
But in this case the SECWAR has been properly advised. If anything it's astonishing that a program whereby China-based Microsoft engineers telling U.S.-based Microsoft engineers specific commands to type in ever made it off the proposal page inside Microsoft, accelerated time-to-market or not.
It defeats the entire purpose of many of the NIST security controls that demand things like U.S.-cleared personnel for government networks, and Microsoft knew those were a thing because that was the whole point to the "digital escort" (a U.S. person who was supposed to vet the Chinese engineer's technical work despite apparently being not technical enough to have just done it themselves).
Some ideas "sell themselves", ideas like these do the opposite.
> If anything it's astonishing that a program whereby China-based Microsoft engineers telling U.S.-based Microsoft engineers specific commands to type in ever made it off the proposal page inside Microsoft, accelerated time-to-market or not.
> It defeats the entire purpose of many of the NIST security controls that demand things like U.S.-cleared personnel for government networks, and Microsoft knew those were a thing because that was the whole point to the "digital escort" (a U.S. person who was supposed to vet the Chinese engineer's technical work despite apparently being not technical enough to have just done it themselves).
Holy fuck. Ok, this will change things considerably for some companies I'm working with that had moved their stuff to Azure. Thanks. More than I can express on here.
I'm sympathetic to the viewpoint but I'm not in the habit of policing the names people use for themselves.
I've certainly done more than my fair share of jobs in the Navy where the office I was formally billeted to had long since ceased to actually exist as described due to office renamings. Often things as simple as a department section being elevated into a department branch and people using the new name even while they wait 1-2 years for the manpower records to be fixed and the POM process to cycle through for program resourcing. But still, seems hard to treat it as a crime at one level when no one blinked an eye at the lower level.
Maybe Congress will eventually step in, but in the meantime the American voters made their choice about who they want to run these agencies, so...
The main title of the office is still “secretary of defense”, the executive order added a secondary title of the department and the office, it didn't replace the primary titles.
> the American voters made their choice about who they want to run these agencies
The American voters don't get to override the U.S. constitution. The American voters also voted in the U.S. Congress, which has the sole authority to name the department and title. My representatives have not voted to change the law. Do you not care about the rule of law?
> I'm not in the habit of policing the names people use for themselves.
I'm sure you think you're being clever, but this is such a bad faith argument.
Of course I do. I hope the rest of my fellow Americans will someday care as much as I do about it. It's clearly not the case today.
But, is it illegal to refer to Secretary Hegseth as the SECWAR?
If so, would it be legal to refer to him as the SECDEF? After all, that isn't the formal term that Congress established his position as under 10 USC 113.
It's not hard to see all the cans of worms that emanate from the topic. I said already that this is Congress's purview, and they have had ample opportunity to put a stake in the ground on their position in response...
These agencies such as the Department of Defense, whose secretary is...?
The department's name is *legally* the Department of Defense. If they want to change it, they can go to Congress and do it the legal way. They have a majority. There's nothing stopping them except for their disregard for the sanctity of the law.
> The United States secretary of defense (SecDef), secondarily titled the secretary of war (SecWar),[b] is the head of the United States Department of Defense (DoD), the executive department of the U.S. Armed Forces, and is a high-ranking member of the cabinet of the United States.[8][9][10]
This was such a genuinely weird moment for me when reading the article.
"yadda yadda and then also the secretary of defence agreed it was bad"
I'm just reading along and going, "yeah that sounds really bad if a secretary level position is being cited... wait a second, isn't that actually the guy who is literally famous for being stupid??"
I never expected to be living through a real life version of "the emperor's new clothes", like, how is anyone quoting this guy about anything?
Modern "skills" and Markdown formats of the day are no different than "save the kittens". All of these practices are promoted by influencers and adopted based on wishful thinking and anecdata.
Uh, this couldn't be more false. I've implemented these from scratch at my company and rolled them out org-wide and I've yet to watch a youtube video and don't consume any influencers. Mostly by just using the tools and reading documentation - as any other technical tool.
Perhaps your blanket statement could be wrong, and I would encourage you to let your mind be a bit more open. The landscape here is not what it was 6 months ago. This is an undeniable fact that people are going to have to come to terms with pretty soon. I did not want to be in this spot, I was forced to out of necessity, because the stuff does work.
To be fair, if you have never watched a YouTube video in your life then how can you say the OP was wrong about what influencers are peddling? Side note, have you ever seen that Onion article on the man that can't stop telling people he doesn't own a TV?
Great, so how do you know this stuff works? Did you evaluate it against other approaches? How do you know it's actually reliable?
The Vercel team had some interesting findings[1]:
> In 56% of eval cases, the skill was never invoked. The agent had access to the documentation but didn't use it.
Others had different findings for commonly accepted practices[2], some you may have adopted from reading documentation, which surely didn't come from influencers.
And yet others swear by magical Markdown documents[3].
So... who is the ultimate authority on what actually works, and who is just cargo culting the trendy practice of the week? And how is any of this different from what was being done a few years ago?
Sorry, but from your first comment, I don’t particularly feel inclined to help you figure this out. I was just offering I’ve already deployed these things at a scale with success using many of the configuration options offered as documentation in the op here. this stuff isn’t some mystical blackbox, although you seem to think it is.
I measure the tooling success with a suite of small prompt tests performing repeatable tasks, measuring the success rate over time, educating the broader team, and providing my own tried and tested in the field skills that I’ve shared to similar successes to the broader teams. We’ve seen a huge increase in velocity and lower bug rate, which are also very easily measurable (and long evaluated stats) enough to put me in the position I am, which was not a reluctant one. You’re perfectly free to view my long history on this topic on this forum to see I am a complete skeptic on this topic, and wouldn’t be here unless I had to.
everyone is figuring this out still. There is no authority, I am my own authority on what I have seen work and what hasn’t. Feel free to take of that what you will. I just wanted to provide a counterpoint to your initial claim. I’m certainly not going to expose to a fine degree what has worked for my org and what hasn’t due to obvious reasons.
I’m a little unclear on the usage of the word “fake” here.
Going by article, these are real people doing actual real work, they often use stolen identities to conceal information about themselves, and they get help from outside sources to do their jobs better.
Whatever the right word is, it’s not “fake”. Maybe fraudulent? Or ulterior motives? Or deceptive? Or pretext? Or threat actor? Or foreign agents?
I agree - this is closer to bonded labor though the paying employer doesn't know it. Instead most of their earnings go to their actual employer (which is the North Korean state). "slave" maybe is more appropriate? "prisoner"?
I know we're getting deep in the meta discussion but the free will that you're describing involves basically starving to death. Sure, you can walk away but unless you're well off, we all basically live in the same society that makes sure you are ALWAYS dependent on some kind of wage. You cannot live off the land, build housing, or eat food without some kind of income in the modern world. And thus the concept of wage slave.
But wage slavery, while bad, isn't slavery still. In slavery proper, the option of walking away straight up doesn't exist. In fact, in extreme cases, even the option of dying might not be available.
It is slavery. Chattel slavery is much more severe than what we normally consider slavery. Yet “slavery” and chattel slavery are both still slavery. The reason what you’re saying is so accepted is because we are currently living under a universal liberal world order that says wage slavery id freedom.
I hope you notice I didn't mention chattel slavery. Even prior to it, all forms of slavery were about removing the agency of person and subjugating the will of the slave to the owner. That requires an active action.
Not hiring someone is a passive action. As said by many, you are not entitled to a wage. In fact, suggesting otherwise would actually require slavery. Wage slavery, instead, is a description of a particular material condition of destitution, not necessarily connected to the ethical evaluation to proper slavery.
No one says "wage slavery is freedom". What the "universal liberal world", that is, the pro-free market side says is that people should be free to associate with each other as they see fit. Being hired to provide labor in exchange for wage, the basis for wage work, is merely an extension of this. While wage work is a requirement for wage slavery, at no point economic liberals said that everyone should live under wage slavery conditions.
The common, orthodixical, sociological/economical meaning of the word "wage slavery" is about being paid, on average, barely enough to make a living, i.e. destitution in the conventional sense.
I suppose you are referring to the Marxist meaning, technically (at least as far as I know) original, meaning. First, Marxist economics are considered heterodoxical nowadays. Second, it is still about "destitution", in the sense that the working class is formally destitute of the means of production, requiring to sell their labor to have access to it. If that's the case, I hope you notice that weakens your point of "wage slavery being a form of slavery", as you lose the analogy of proper material conditions.
Sounds like having a w2 is a pretty good deal for you then.
Slavery isn’t defined by “I don’t want to talk away because the deal is too good”, it’s more like “I’m unable to walk away because I’m threatened with force if I do so”
My dad used to refer to that as the golden handcuffs when he worked for GE. Wouldn't compare it to slavery though, he just felt trapped there because nobody else would pay him that well or give him as good of benefits
The implication is that they're pretending to be legitimate employees whereas they are actually exfiltrating IP from a hostile nation state. Seems valid.
"Fake" seems fine. If I buy a fake watch, that might mean that it's a real watch that does its job of telling time, but it says "Rolex" on the front and that's a lie.
I agree that fake is an odd word to describe this. Most likely much of our IT infrastructure is extremely compromised. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the major password/healthcare/etc... leaks in the past 6 years were the result of someone "accidentally" setting a cloud bucket to public.
I actually turned down a fly-to-texas for an in person interview about a year back, but I do think in the age of the internet if we don't sacrifice some of the things we have taken for granted in the past, we're going to lose our country. Perhaps there should be a law that requires a picture of any employee standing next to their boss for continued employment - at some point in the future. (this is just an idea, not to start a flamewar, don't attack the specific idea, but attack the idea of some kind of extra checking if you don't agree with it)
Labeling the actual worker negatively seems harsh - they are probably being forced into it by the state. You might say they can willingly underperform and not be used this way - but if the alternative is a much harder life, could you blame them for playing along?
It's North Korea though and they're all eViL. Imagine a world where the U.S lifted sanctions on N.K. traded with them and stopped crying about losing a war 70 years ago. Ah well a boy can dream.
Edit:
Lol saying anything positive about North Korea on hacker news and people instantly freak out. This fucking website man. North Korea isn't what I would call a free society but it's also not the hell on earth that most liberals want you to think it is. So much of the misery that normal North Koreans have to face is because of western imposed sanctions. We've tried punishing them for 30 years now, it hasn't destroyed the regime if anything they double down. I guess it's easy for a bunch of overfed over paid tech workers to not feel any kind of solidarity for a North Korean though and insist on punishing them even more. Hell the North Korean government would even be open for this kind of agreement if we would actually guarantee their sovereignty, sadly trusting the United States of America to hold up any kind of deal you make with them is fucking impossible.
Here is a quote I came up with but is attributed to Henry Kissinger
Having the United States as your enemy is dangerous, but having them as your friend is fatal.
That old bag liked it so much he had no problem taking credit for it.
Lot's of people have tried trading with North Korea, but they're politically unreliable. China and Russia both try obviously, but so has South Korea. These cooperations usually work for a while but eventually the unreliable reality of the North Korean government wrecks it for them. If it were all America's fault, as these sort of regimes always claim, they'd be able to get on well enough with their neighbors, but they can't.
The United States plays a large role in destabilizing them I went to a lecture at my university where a South Korean professor said as much. He was hardly a fan of the North Korean regime. At this point the regime has zero interest in cooperation, I'm sorry but your government is slowly becoming an authoritarian state in its own right and is currently causing chaos at the behest of Israel a country which just commuted a genocide with the blessing of both parties in your country. Imagine trying to get along with your neighbor when they have billions of dollars of military hardware on your border. No country is to willing to cooperate with North Korea because being in the good graces of the United States is 100x more beneficial. You claim that North Korea can't get along with its neighbors please remind me which country invaded and artificialy divided Korea when they elected some one The United States didn't like.
The US has been authoritarian for a long time. What else do you call a society that keeps on humming along while doing various genocides via a culturally embedded Monroe Doctrine mentality.
Korea was divided by both United States and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union organized elections, rigging towards a rather unpopular figure, even within the national socialist circles, for their imperialist purposes.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but where did OP state was american? How is their nationality even relevant here? How is the american descent to authoritarianism, which is still far from a autocratic socialist regime (at least yet), relevant to NK being distrusted even by USA's opposition (i.e. China and Russia)?
The US has fuck all to do with it. Vietnam whooped America's ass in a war which was far more socially significant for the American public (the Korean War is called the "Forgotten War" in America), still has their communist government, yet has normalized (relatively) relations with America and certainly the rest of the world and trades with everybody. North Korea is economically isolated because they refuse to be normal even by communist standards.
I don’t get what you’re saying. There is a paused civil war due to outsiders (whites, UN, etc) interfering and still occupying half the country.
Not sure what you mean what crime did the current outsider occupiers commit after they did a genocide (and not using this lightly. There aren’t that many genocides)?
Sob stories are available against/for every major human conflict. The story you linked isn’t really relevant even to the severity of what we are talking about.
None of the sides are occupied, though, neither by UN, "white" people, etc. That's literally just propaganda. At best, by a large stretch too, one could say NK is occupied by Russia and China, the only countries currently vouching for NK, and, as previously stated, that's a stretch given their reluctance towards Kim' personal kingdom. It is more accurate to say NK serves as a buffer state to them.
What genocide are you referring to? The Shichon Massacre? The one only NK sources claim outsiders commit, for the sole purpose of promoting xenophobia and ultranationalism?
Finally, I think you straight up didn't read the reference. How exactly kidnapping 2 movie directors just to produce propaganda pieces are justifiably helpful to the war effort? I hope you have the decency to realize that this isn't a war tragedy, where innocents are killed/multilated despite best efforts. This is a large private corporation kidnapping 2 civilians from the other side for strictly private purposes.
If the relevance to the discussion isn't clear, the point is that North Korea, even as a Stalinist-inspired socialist country, doesn't need to commit the crimes it does to survive. You are just trying to dismiss NK's particularly rogue behavior under the excuse that "west"(which, in this context, is just a propaganda term, could've used just USA instead) oppresses them, ignoring even other socialist countries that do not have to stoop so low.
Vietnam didn't submit to America, they kicked Americas ass. You need to get a clue. I can't help but notice you're refusing to even acknowledge the point of Vietnam, because it makes you look like an idiot.
Come to think of it, what is a leftoid like you even doing defending North Korea? You should be disowning them. You should be pointing out that North Korea is a de facto monarchy and therefore definitionally Right Wing. You should be arguing North Korea as yet another failed extremist right wing regime. Why do I have to explain your own ideology to you? Is it that you like to get dominated? Come to me, dumb slut, we can be friends. I don't discriminate.
While one could scrutinize the accuracy the of the west being a dictatorship (which will likely devolve into a discussion of semantics), I prefer to call attention to the fact that calling North Korea a dictatorship does not require to speak well of the west. Likewise, one can simultaneously criticize the west without protecting its "enemies". Such a binary, poorly critical, way of thinking is ill-suited in pursuing better material conditions for all.
Wow so you guys don't have ideological brain worms at all. I can tell you guys have never studied international relations because you refuse to try an take North Koreas concerns seriously. Do I have to remind you that a South Korean attempted a fascist coup recently and that it was left wing organisations and trade unions that mobilised to stop him?
Also which "communist dictators" are you talking about, and how do you know this? You do realise that the United States is also a one party state when it comes to foreign policy right?
> Wow so you guys don't have ideological brain worms at all.
You have to remember that the supermajority of this site are ultra AnCaps who believe that anything which infringes upon the right of companies to kill people is Communist satanism and a significant minority agrees wholeheartedly with Peter Thiel's weird brand of techno-accelerationism and actively participates in NRx movements.
Like, I understand what you want to get at and I wholeheartedly agree! Just don't be too surprised at the pushback.
Those scholars are blowhards. Trump is basically the same as any other time. As you state the US is unipolar in how it treats Others. Aka authoritarian.
> Do I have to remind you that a South Korean attempted a fascist coup recently and that it was left wing organisations and trade unions that mobilised to stop him?
Those "left wing organizations" encompass the majority of South Korea, almost 2/3 of the current parliament, and the current sitting government. And may I remind you that South Korea's current "leftist" president recently gifted Trump a golden crown to get favorable deals?
> Do I have to remind you that a South Korean attempted a fascist coup recently
By "fascist", I suppose you mean right-wing. Going by the average RW authoritarian dictatorship, that's still better than the documented NK conditions, specially given that most fall later.
> ...[...] and that it left wing organizations and trade unions that mobilized to stop him?
Nice cherry picking. Even Yoon's own party turned against him.
But even ignoring the right wing here, said left wing organizations are also in opposition to NK.
> You do realize that the United States is a one party state when it comes to foreign policy right?
That sentence doesn't make sense. There's no such thing as "one party state foreign policy". The idea of a one party state is specifically about a state that is intolerant to any other ideas other than those accepted by the one true party. If you are referring to USA's aggressiveness, may I remind you that that switches between presidents.
> If you love freedom so much shouldn't this be worrying more?
Who cares what they're called. Main concern in this case is that the result of their work poses danger to the US. Like a spies. They often do legit work and meanwhile some "extra"
I find to be true for expensive approvals as well.
If I can approve something without review, it’s instant. If it requires only immediate manager, it takes a day. Second level takes at least ten days. Third level trivially takes at least a quarter (at least two if approaching the end of the fiscal year). And the largest proposals I’ve pushed through at large companies, going up through the CEO, take over a year.
The PR won’t take 5 hours of work, but it could easily sit that long waiting for another engineer to willing to context switch from their own heads-down work.
Exaxtly. Can you get a lawyer on the phone now or do you wait ~ 5 hours. How about a doctor appt. Or a vet appt. Or a mechanic visit.
Needing full human attention on a co.plex task from a pro who can only look at your thing has a wait time. It is worse when there are only 2 or 3 such people in the world you can ask!
Exactly. Even if I hammer the erstwhile reviewer with Teams/Slack messages to get it moved to the top of the queue and finished before the 5 hours are up, then all the other reviews get pushed down. It averages out, and the review market corrects.
It just sits there, with no one touching it. Suddenly, music randomly starts and stops playing. Take it into the Apple Store, they acknowledge it’s a known hardware defect to start registering non-existent touches, and they refuse to fix it. Offer to replace it with a refurb unit for like ~$20 less than a brand new unit.
FWIW we use the minis all over our place and love'em. But we pretty much only ask basic questions or use them for airplay. Sounds quality is impressive imo.
A “ban” is literally government interference.
Pick a lane.
reply