Hacker News Reader

Comment by 9283409232 | Hacker News Reader

> The move underscores the awesome power of corporations — the appistocracy, as I call them, or “non-state entities,” the directive’s euphemistic term.

This term already exist. It's corporatocracy. Not to be confused with an oligarchy which can overlap with a corporatocracy.

> Several years ago an FBI recruiter lamented to me how difficult hiring cyber talent had become, given how much better tech companies pay than the Bureau. “All we can offer is patriotism,” I recall her sighing.

People find the 3 letter agencies to be corrupt and gross. Good Will Hunting has a scene dedicated to this. The fact FAANG pays incredibly well is just a bonus.

View on HN

though some intellectuals may delight in listing the sins of the three letter agencies at length and in detail, it is probably overgeneralizing to say "everyone finds this" .. Actual career families pass down the profession in different ways.. some appreciate the stable income to start.. Overall, there has to be something like those agencies with career professionals. How to minimize harm?

It's a generalization but I'm not sure it's overgeneralizing. I don't think many people have a good or even neutral opinion on the FBI or NSA.

True, but I have a fairly positive opinion of the EPA, FDA, CDC, IRS, FTC, and a neutral opinion on the FCC, DOT and others. The DOD and DOJ are hard to have an opinion about, partly as they're so much a reflection of what the President wants, partly because they have huge internal constraints, logistical and legal respectively.

I do not subscribe to the view that agencies are just running around doing their own thing without much regard to who's in the White House.

This article is talking about intelligence agencies which none of those you listed are. I don't know if you didn't read it or just want to point out any 3 letter agencies to be technically correct.

Comments above broadened the scope and hostility to any government agencies is rampant in some quarters.

Overall, there has to be something like those agencies with career professionals. How to minimize harm?

20% of the people do 80% of the work. The problem is incentives. Which political appointee has the incentive to fight the federal workers union and be great manager, rewarding the 20% and punishing the rest? Until the next election?

It's tragic, but this inability to deal with federal employees is a reason why perhaps getting rid of whole departments is the only practical way to make real reforms.

This sounds like a truism, and truisms don't seem like a great basis for policy. Surely you can come up with some more objective measure of federal worker productivity rather than relying on lazy cliches.

Snow Crash is, yet again, so prescient in this regard. Still waiting on my Deliverator

Reply on news.ycombinator.com