OK lefties . . .
- Thread starter CO. Hoosier
- Start date
Here is what he said in that article:
“Anybody who’s been in the payment system and the processes, who knows the easiest way to find the fraudster is to stop payments and listen, because whoever screams is the one stealing,” he said. “Because my mother-in-law’s not calling, come on, your mother, 80-year-olds, 90-year-olds, they trust the government.”
He said his MiL would not call. Not that she would call and understand If that is an incorrect quote than I am wrong and freely admit it was a mistake. But I would love to see a transcript your way or an audio. It is certainly possible this was wrong, but I checked that quote in two different stories. Of course they may both have had the same root.
Gotcha. I knew some of his background story because he's a Bitcoiner. I'll check it out. Bessent was on there recently as well.
Just order the SSA to purge them, though purging them shouldn’t be necessary and shouldn’t be done. They should have a record of everyone that ever received SS payments. Purging everyone that shouldn’t be getting payments is something they should be doing. Once again, order the SSA to do it. Provide any assistance required.
I’m sure those are the exact words, but he was using SS as an analogy for the cutting of grants and contracts as they’ve done in other parts of the government. It’s clear from the context of the interview if you actually listen to it as I have. He’s saying the most hysterical, probably deserve the most scrutiny.
Evidence of this is at no point did he suggest cutting off SS payments. This admin hasn’t and they won’t.
I think you're too personally affected by budget cuts.
When people point out the debt, all we get back is "But Social Security". Like there's no reason to cut anything else in discretionary spending.
So we can't slash the deficit by $2 trillion. How about by $1 trillion? Does that not lower the growth of the debt? You don't think getting rid of unnecessary spending is going to pay dividends down the road when these aren't included in baseline budgeting?
Now you’re offering opinion on how and who you want to run things.
Run for office, no one is stopping you.
This is how Trump is running things. It’s legal. It’s what he more or less promised voters.
And all you guys really have is innuendo about abuse, corruption and self-dealing.
Computer security principle #1 is least privilege. If you need everyone's phone numbers to call them in, you get that but not their Social Security numbers or I9 info. If you need their tax info for payroll, you do not get their FMLA info. I have had to do this stuff for a long time.it certainly appears Musk's people have demanded and on occasion been given everything. That is just crazy to me. I am sorry if I cannot properly explain why and how wrong it is, it just is.
Heck, I am forbidden to look at any personal data on a computer I repair. I like that rule, it is a good rule that I follow religiously. If you want me to look at a file and fix a problem, I ask you to open it and not me.
I have folders with employee data set to record if I go into the folders, and record if I turn that off. I should never, ever, see anyone's employee records. It is not my job. But I have access because I handle restores. Someone deleted a file and needs it restored, I log the date and time and restore it. My log matches up with the access log and all is good. I gave my boss the job of checking access logs so I can't fudge that. I don't think he liked it, but understood why.
Some of the DOGE people are rocket scientists. I am sure they are brilliant I seriously doubt they have been trained in handling critical data. Obviously not, one tried to sell it from a previous employer and another emailed it.
Heck, I am forbidden to look at any personal data on a computer I repair. I like that rule, it is a good rule that I follow religiously. If you want me to look at a file and fix a problem, I ask you to open it and not me.
I have folders with employee data set to record if I go into the folders, and record if I turn that off. I should never, ever, see anyone's employee records. It is not my job. But I have access because I handle restores. Someone deleted a file and needs it restored, I log the date and time and restore it. My log matches up with the access log and all is good. I gave my boss the job of checking access logs so I can't fudge that. I don't think he liked it, but understood why.
Some of the DOGE people are rocket scientists. I am sure they are brilliant I seriously doubt they have been trained in handling critical data. Obviously not, one tried to sell it from a previous employer and another emailed it.
Sorry, Marv, but as a voter for Biden, you have one helluva lot of chutzpa bringing up pardons.
This was never promised. The last paragraph doesn’t apply to me.
Ever hear of Domestic Terrorism? The Biden DOJ was big on that, remember?All for prosecuting these nuts, but shouldn't this be a local or state matter? If someone vandalized a bunch of Ford pickup trucks, that would be a local matter, right? What makes this a federal case? I'm interested in the legal opinions.
3 alleged Tesla attackers could face up to 20 years for Molotov cocktails
Three individuals are facing "serious charges" for allegedly using Molotov cocktails to set Tesla items on fire, the Justice Department announced.www.usatoday.com
If those throwing homemade bombs are charged with that, I’m all for it.
Just think of it as going throught Melania's underwear drawer - you'd be fine with it.
Last edited:
What does that have to do with it?
This is a national movement that is obviously terrorism. No bomb needed.
So if some dipshit keys a Tesla you’re all about calling it domestic terrorism? Don’t the Feds have more to do than focus on vandalism?
I think it’s more the doxing of Tesla owners, Molotov cocktails and large scale arson that has the feds concerned.
You're now arguing a lot of different things. I'll try to address them all.
I'm focused on the concern about (1) the amount of power Musk is wielding, and (2) that speculation that he is stealing the government's big data and individual medical, health, social security records of every single American. I don't think his lack of a plan bears on either issue.
From what I've read, the types of things Musk is doing do not convey "unheard of power." He's essentially an auditor or outside consultant reviewing the books and making suggestions. Yes, his suggestions are often followed but they need not be. Notice Patel and others told him to **** off so just how much power do you really think he is wielding here?
That is a separate question from his execution with DOGE, lack of care, violation of rules surrounding handling data, etc. I think DOGE has made quite a few giant blunders there, and don't think I've ever hinted otherwise. But what I'm trying to drill down on is this--has anyone actually been hurt by these procedural **** ups? I freely admit people have been hurt by lay offs--but that is a policy issue, that the President wants to see happen. So I consider that separate and apart from these screw ups and ignorance of rules surrounding data handling, etc.
As for Musk's feelings, where have I said we should give a damn about those? He's a big boy, who involved himself in govt on his own so I don't think that's a consideration here.
Who or what is Apartheid Clyde?
Re the safeguards in place right now, I don't know what they are so no, I can't point you to them. I also can't do that with the Defense Department or any number of government agencies.
Last edited:
Can you track the various editing done by date and time and user?
Well, I was gonna go burn me a Tesla and drink a Bud Light, then illegally kill some vultures eating a dead skunk in the road around the corner, but I stayed home and read this thread instead.
The Tesla owner and buzzards thank y’all.
The Tesla owner and buzzards thank y’all.
There's a difference between keying a single vehicle and doing it to multiple ones.
Just like there's a difference in keying a vehicle and setting fire to a dealership.
I would be willing to bet that anyone today caught doing any of these things have a history of violence of some kind. That's terrorism, in my opinion.
I cannot prove anything has harmed anyone yet. Anytime there is a data breach I cannot prove there is harm. Often it is held onto for years before anything bad is done with the data. Exposing data is considered a breach even if no one evil gets it. Have an unencrypted laptop with Social Security numbers stolen and it is a data breach, you don't have to wait on someone to illegally use the data. For all you know, the bad actor wiped the drive without stealing the data, but it does not matter. You have to report it to the feds.
In addition, reckless action with critical information (SSN, FERPA HIPAA, is criminal in the states. I know of no federal crime, so Musk's kids are probably lucky. Though I suspect a normal employee would be fired From IU's website on Indiana's laws:
A knowing, intentional, or reckless disclosure of an SSN in violation of the new law is a felony, which carries up to 3 years' jail time and up to $10,000 in fines. A negligent disclosure is an "infraction," which carries up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.
Similarly, any violation of the data disposal law is a misdemeanor carrying up to 60 days' jail time and up to $500 in fines; if the violation involves the data of more than 100 persons or is a second violation, then the penalties increase to up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.
Finally, there is the possibility that violations of these laws may result in lawsuits filed against IU and/or individual personnel involved in the violations, see below.
Indiana Data Protection Laws FAQ: Protecting Data: Online Safety & Security: Indiana University
This page provides detailed information on principal Indiana state data protection laws.
Why is it wrong to hold Musk et al to the same accountability a normal employee is? I would be shocked if the feds do not have policies demanding usual and customary protection in securing data.
I have agreed we need reform. We are not under attack. They are not doing The Lord's Work. They need held to the same standards the usual caretakers are. That standard is not, "we haven't seen the data misused, so no harm no foul." You are a lawyer, you can look up how likely that defense is to succeed. In fact I will categorically bow to your legal judgement. Research it, come back and say that is a winning defense to exposing data and I will retract everything. I have been taught in many professional classes that I don't need proof the data has been misused. Maybe that is wrong.
They have an employee who sold corporate secrets to a rival. How does that not raise alarm bells anywhere?
I suspect when you see lawyers not following usual and customary rules, you get upset at them. "Hey Judge, my client admitted to the crime when we were talking" probably would not earn your respect. Allow someone who deals with data the same.
Seriously, research it, let me know if not yet found to be misused is a strong defense to accidental disclosure. I have been taught it is more like Aloha's Top Secret data, if I put it on an unencrypted laptop and lose the laptop, I have committed a crime. Now in Aloha's case, putting on the laptop is a crime. In my case, it is a violation of policy and I could be held accountable but if I keep possession I do not think it is a crime. But I know my bosses would not be happy
Not DOGE'S fault but Trump ordered the JFK files released with Social Security numbers. Of course someone is still alive and is using that number. Crazy, never release those numbers. That person is suing. I would predict an easy win for them.
Trump defends the release of Social Security numbers in JFK files: 'We gave everything'
President Donald Trump is defending the release of Social Security numbers that were made public through the JFK files.
www.usatoday.com
It’s no longer there now. That area of downtown Columbus is getting a nice overhaul though.
I don't think I am going to be impacted by them. What I am personally affected by is things you guys talk about in the abstract, I actually see. I know Musk is looked upon as a "genius" and in some aspects he is. I am just telling you that I am actually in a position to see what all the Twitter bluster looks like in application and this "genius", when it comes to this stuff, doesn't know what he is doing.
I know there are several people on here who have ostensibly been on my side that take issue with what I am saying and I am ok with that. I am just some screen name on a sports message board. Yeah, some of this has impacted me, mostly as unnecessary stress and annoyances, but I think that there are things going on here that don't feel right to me and it goes beyond the Musk and DOGE junk. And frankly, I think you are having some misgivings about some things on the foreign policy front yourself.....
There are reasons to cut things in discretionary spending. You know who would know where to cut some of that fat? Good government employees. I work with a whole bunch, you don't think we don't know who the poor performers are? You know there is a process set up in the government where you can announce a reduction in force and that poor performers are among the first on the block to be let go. Clinton did that process in the 90's. Musk is currently paying a certain percentage of the federal workforce to sit at home and still collect a check until the end of the fiscal year. "Take my offer and you can go on vacation or do whatever you want until October..." Some new good performers left because they felt they were probably going to be let go anyway and they could go find another job. Not one below average performer in the area I am in took the offer. So not only does Musk's stupid idea cost more because he is paying for half a year of salary for no work when RIF is much cheaper, but he also chased off the wrong people.
And I come to the forum and get, "This dude is a genius, how can you bash him. Look he is just cutting the government and saving money, how could you have a problem with that?" Well, because I have personally seen the impact of some of this and it isn't abstract to me and so I know for a fact that Mr. Genius messed up. And that is just with his program. He messed up the firings too. Which is why they are losing court cases. "Just tell them all they were poor performers and fire them...." This isn't the private sector and this isn't his fiefdom. If they wanted probationary employees to go, RIF. It takes a little time to do that though and this was all about showing off for his Twitter/X sycophants. They were all cheering him on, "Yeah you get those lazy good for nothings! We have a genius in charge now!" Well Mr. Genius just lost court cases (which cost money) and had to reinstate employees (costs more money) and is now going to have to go and do this by the statutorily defined method which would almost be coming to a conclusion right now if he had done that in the first place.
So respectfully, tech bro may know more about programming and how to sell people that he knows more than he really does know, but when he delves into an area where people actually have experience, I have heard it said that you realize that he doesn't maybe know as much as he lets on. And this is one of those areas where I know he messed up and I was telling people on this forum he was messing up and here we are.
So I got off a tangent up above but want to bring it back to why Social Security always gets brought up and to maybe turn one of your statements above back on you while also answering this. Yeah, I think some cuts can be made. The issue I have is with saying, "We were spending money on some stupid (and in my opinion counterproductive) things with USAID so all that needs to go. Get rid of it all." The things is, I think you can buy some stability and goodwill relatively cheaply if we spend that money a little more wisely. So yeah, let's find some savings but I think that things government should do fall under that doscretionary category quite a bit and discretionary spending is at near historic lows.
Fiscal Data Explains Federal Spending
Check out @FiscalService Fiscal Data’s new federal spending page! #FederalSpending
fiscaldata.treasury.gov
There is a chart under the "Spending Categories" in the above link that gives a percentage and dollar breakdown of how much has been spent on each category by the government so far this fiscal year, I have shared this link before and would encourage you to go and see where you think we could cut $500B (since we are only half way through the year) from discretionary spending. Can't touch Social Security ($631B), Medicare ($443B), most of Health ($399B), none of Net Interest ($396B), and most of Veterans Benefits and Services is untouchable as well ($170B). So where you can cut, National Defense ($399B), Income Security ($323B), Education, Training and Social Services ($88B), Transportation ($56B), Natural Resources and environment ($49B) and then everything else like Department of Justice and such would fall under Other ($86B).
When you look at the numbers you get an idea really quick that the trillion dollar cut you are talking about means you don't believe the government should really be much more than people with guns who take money from these people and give it to those people.
So why does Social Security get brought up in conversations like this? Well, because it is 21% of the budget and when combined with it's sister in spending Medicare, the costs of those programs are 36% of the budget. Which is where I bring your first statement about me being too closely affected by budget cuts back to the forefront. I think there are a bunch of retired people on this board. Why shouldn't Social Security and Medicare be on the chopping block? I can show you article after article where the growth in government spending is being driven by those two things. Why should benefits be held static for the baby boomers who have been told this cataclysm budget failure was coming for the majority of their adult lives yet continuously voted to kick the can? People can work longer these days, I know several septuagenarians working still. Social Security wasn't supposed to be all of someone's retirement. Why are retirees entitled to my money? Wouldn't the same argument apply to them? Why should they get health coverage at a cost that many people in their 20's can't have for themselves but are forced to pay for others?
Retired Republicans love them some Socialism when they are the recipient of the checks. "But, but that is my money I paid into that...." OK, say we buy that argument. Well, you underfunded your retirement despite the warnings for the past 30 or 40 years and now your kids and grandkids need to clip your benefits because of your failure to plan.
And I don't know if you are of Social Security age so the "you" in these isn't applied to you per se, it is an argument about retirees having the gall to tell people to "learn how to code" because of the deficit when they, and the retirees that came before them, are the main driver of that deficit.
One last point, we have already spent $355B more this FY than last FY when looking at the same timeframes. All this cutting is just scalp taking. This is what all the messing with government workers is about:
"We want bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want to put them in trauma." - Russell Vought, Director of OMB
I do tend to take personal what has clearly been intended to be taken that way. Retirees that cheer on Javier Milei should take a look at what he did with his country's social security program:
I don't want any complaining when the World's richest man gets around to doing the same thing here....
You can prove harm with data breaches. There are MDLs across the nation litigating that very issue pretty much all the time for the last 10 years.I cannot prove anything has harmed anyone yet. Anytime there is a data breach I cannot prove there is harm. Often it is held onto for years before anything bad is done with the data. Exposing data is considered a breach even if no one evil gets it. Have an unencrypted laptop with Social Security numbers stolen and it is a data breach, you don't have to wait on someone to illegally use the data. For all you know, the bad actor wiped the drive without stealing the data, but it does not matter. You have to report it to the feds.
In addition, reckless action with critical information (SSN, FERPA HIPAA, is criminal in the states. I know of no federal crime, so Musk's kids are probably lucky. Though I suspect a normal employee would be fired From IU's website on Indiana's laws:
A knowing, intentional, or reckless disclosure of an SSN in violation of the new law is a felony, which carries up to 3 years' jail time and up to $10,000 in fines. A negligent disclosure is an "infraction," which carries up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.Similarly, any violation of the data disposal law is a misdemeanor carrying up to 60 days' jail time and up to $500 in fines; if the violation involves the data of more than 100 persons or is a second violation, then the penalties increase to up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.Finally, there is the possibility that violations of these laws may result in lawsuits filed against IU and/or individual personnel involved in the violations, see below.Indiana Data Protection Laws FAQ: Protecting Data: Online Safety & Security: Indiana University
This page provides detailed information on principal Indiana state data protection laws.informationsecurity.iu.edu
Why is it wrong to hold Musk et al to the same accountability a normal employee is? I would be shocked if the feds do not have policies demanding usual and customary protection in securing data.
I have agreed we need reform. We are not under attack. They are not doing The Lord's Work. They need held to the same standards the usual caretakers are. That standard is not, "we haven't seen the data misused, so no harm no foul." You are a lawyer, you can look up how likely that defense is to succeed. In fact I will categorically bow to your legal judgement. Research it, come back and say that is a winning defense to exposing data and I will retract everything. I have been taught in many professional classes that I don't need proof the data has been misused. Maybe that is wrong.
They have an employee who sold corporate secrets to a rival. How does that not raise alarm bells anywhere?
I suspect when you see lawyers not following usual and customary rules, you get upset at them. "Hey Judge, my client admitted to the crime when we were talking" probably would not earn your respect. Allow someone who deals with data the same.
Seriously, research it, let me know if not yet found to be misused is a strong defense to accidental disclosure. I have been taught it is more like Aloha's Top Secret data, if I put it on an unencrypted laptop and lose the laptop, I have committed a crime. Now in Aloha's case, putting on the laptop is a crime. In my case, it is a violation of policy and I could be held accountable but if I keep possession I do not think it is a crime. But I know my bosses would not be happy
Musk and any DOGE employees should be held to the same accountability as any other government employee, whatever those standards are.I cannot prove anything has harmed anyone yet. Anytime there is a data breach I cannot prove there is harm. Often it is held onto for years before anything bad is done with the data. Exposing data is considered a breach even if no one evil gets it. Have an unencrypted laptop with Social Security numbers stolen and it is a data breach, you don't have to wait on someone to illegally use the data. For all you know, the bad actor wiped the drive without stealing the data, but it does not matter. You have to report it to the feds.
In addition, reckless action with critical information (SSN, FERPA HIPAA, is criminal in the states. I know of no federal crime, so Musk's kids are probably lucky. Though I suspect a normal employee would be fired From IU's website on Indiana's laws:
A knowing, intentional, or reckless disclosure of an SSN in violation of the new law is a felony, which carries up to 3 years' jail time and up to $10,000 in fines. A negligent disclosure is an "infraction," which carries up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.Similarly, any violation of the data disposal law is a misdemeanor carrying up to 60 days' jail time and up to $500 in fines; if the violation involves the data of more than 100 persons or is a second violation, then the penalties increase to up to 1 year jail time and up to $5,000 in fines.Finally, there is the possibility that violations of these laws may result in lawsuits filed against IU and/or individual personnel involved in the violations, see below.Indiana Data Protection Laws FAQ: Protecting Data: Online Safety & Security: Indiana University
This page provides detailed information on principal Indiana state data protection laws.
Why is it wrong to hold Musk et al to the same accountability a normal employee is? I would be shocked if the feds do not have policies demanding usual and customary protection in securing data.
I have agreed we need reform. We are not under attack. They are not doing The Lord's Work. They need held to the same standards the usual caretakers are. That standard is not, "we haven't seen the data misused, so no harm no foul." You are a lawyer, you can look up how likely that defense is to succeed. In fact I will categorically bow to your legal judgement. Research it, come back and say that is a winning defense to exposing data and I will retract everything. I have been taught in many professional classes that I don't need proof the data has been misused. Maybe that is wrong.
They have an employee who sold corporate secrets to a rival. How does that not raise alarm bells anywhere?
I suspect when you see lawyers not following usual and customary rules, you get upset at them. "Hey Judge, my client admitted to the crime when we were talking" probably would not earn your respect. Allow someone who deals with data the same.
Seriously, research it, let me know if not yet found to be misused is a strong defense to accidental disclosure. I have been taught it is more like Aloha's Top Secret data, if I put it on an unencrypted laptop and lose the laptop, I have committed a crime. Now in Aloha's case, putting on the laptop is a crime. In my case, it is a violation of policy and I could be held accountable but if I keep possession I do not think it is a crime. But I know my bosses would not be happy
If no one is harmed by an accidental or unknowing violation where govt data is not disclosed outside the govt but only to other govt employees, I have a hard time believing anyone would go to jail. But that isn’t my area of expertise.
I will say I’ve seen lawyers accidentally disseminate social security numbers of large groups of people (either in a court filing or just to the other side in discovery) and both sides and the court act as quickly as possible to remedy the situation but after that, there is no prosecution, etc. just embarrassment and maybe an admonition from the judge to be more careful.
Have you read a piece by a legal expert in this area that argues Musk has already committed a crime w/r/t his work at DOGE? If you point me to it, I’ll read it.
Marv can speak to this better than I, but I'm sure they can to some extent depending on the application and platform. That metadata can also be edited, so...
Yes, it can be tracked easily as long as the person does not know how to edit that. It is possible but requires more significant expertise.
