If we're going to upvote these things on Hacker News, can we try to stick to comments that are less butt-hurt and more constructive? Yes, the technology industry is reeling from the fact that the preferred candidate did not win.
However, we are supposed to be hackers here, not some whiny intelligentsia. Please take off your sad hat and put back on the hacker hat. Bend the rules. Enact the change that you can from the position you are in. Get involved in any way you can. We cannot change the results of the election, but we can work with the framework and try to improve it for the better. Embrace the suck, and let's step forward in any way possible.
Was going to post something similar myself. No offense, but a lot of my liberal-leaning colleagues/friends/HN users sound like whinier Republicans when Democrats were in power.
Progress used to be made in the US through compromise. I want one thing, another person wants another, we sit down and bash out what's acceptable to both of us and the country is the better for that negotiation.
There are Trump policies that I will fight possibly to my death should they ever be attempted, but there are also a non-zero number I think might be good for this country.
As micaksica suggested, hackers act on the world they have, not on the world they wish existed.
For those wondering how this got done so quickly, both campaigns had transition offices in DC--funded in part with federal dollars--that got started months ago.
The modern presidency is so complex that a transition can no longer be accomplished effectively in the time between November 8 and January 20. So a bipartisan project created the concept of multiple transition offices that get government funds to operate.
Obviously the Clinton transition office is in the process of winding now right now, and the Trump office is expanding rapidly.
I wonder if anything is done with the losing candidate's transition office.
Like, do they put together a two-page list of the most important, nonpartisan conclusions they reached and hand it off to their counterparts? I'd like to think so, but I'm hardly optimistic.
Anyone know if anything from Digital Service and 18F will get transitioned over? I'll be extra sad if making America great again also means making all the websites ugly and unusable too.
The page on Tax Reform[0] seems... interesting. Here's the first paragraph:
> Anyone who fills out a tax form knows how harmful the U.S. tax code is today – punishing hard work, savings, and investment. American frustration with the tax code has prompted two decades of Washington, D.C. blue ribbon commissions and detailed plans to reform the code. These efforts have not changed the tremendous burden Americans face in complying with the U.S. tax code. If a tax code were designed to punish hard work, thrift, and investment, the current U.S. tax code could serve as a blueprint.
Autosummarizer[1] summarizes the first paragraph as follows:
> If a tax code were designed to punish hard work, thrift, and investment, the current U.S. tax code could serve as a blueprint.
Can someone seriously explain to me why this is a bad thing (except the part "Mexico will pay for it")? Isn't it is any country's interest to protect their borders? Mind you, the wall is only stopping "illegal" immigrants; I can't really imagine how a politician could oppose the wall and hence support illegal immigration, support crime. Even Germany is starting to rethink their "open borders" policies...
This focus on the person instead of measures is very, very concerning. Seriously, there's a video feature prominently called "My Dad". Pictures of him everywhere.
Do you remember the Obama campaign? Some cult of personality always exists around charismatic leaders. Fairey's "Hope" poster was an epitome of personality-driven political propaganda.
So you can submit ideas here I see. I submitted a plea to embrace climate change from an economic standpoint - "renewable energy technologies will be in high demand, and there is a huge opportunity for whichever nation is first to market." Perhaps the prospect of making zillions in solar panel sales can give them pause.
The Clinton campaign policy priorities were right there on the campaign web site. They were voluminous, and well thought-out, and written/backed by serious domain experts, and thoroughly ignored by everyone because emailz.
Seriously contrast the stuff there with the pablum here, which boils down to junk like "education is important yo" and "we're going to eliminate excess regulation about, like, stuff".
I assume they had it ready to go and live and putting it in to production was simply a matter of registering the domain and pointing the DNS at the server hosting this.
From what I understand a large portion of people would be happy to sign off on that domain name, another large portion wouldn't, and a final large portion would not fall into either camp. Of course the reasons for each are diverse, contradictory, and surprising.
Now that it's finally over and people won't be able to push for their preferred candidate, can someone shed light on what the email ruckus was all about?
Sure, personal server was used, etc. However, this is a community of tech literate people. We know that email is not and cannot be a secure medium. The only ways I can think of to transmit secure email messages is by making the medium irrelevant (encryption), or by using something else (ie. private 'secure' email-like mechanism).
Had the emails been encrypted, it wouldn't matter if they were stored on top of the hollywood sign. So what gives? Does that mean that the US transfers classified information through totally insecure channels?
To answer your specific question, the federal government deals with the same security vs. convenience dilemma that everyone else does. There are classified communications systems but they have fewer client devices and are harder to use.
Quite a few of the emails in Clinton's inbox that contained classified information were drafted by other people in other agencies (including CIA, NSA, etc) who either did not realize that a particular piece of info was classified, or who wanted to get it to her quickly through the most convenient medium--they did a risk/reward calculation and hit send.
The other thing to know about classified information is that it does not get unclassified just because it's public. So if I email you a NYTimes article about a classified drone strike program, you now have classified info in your inbox. Again, that explains some of the emails she had in her inbox--forwarding news stories around.
Finally, the amount of classified information is staggering and detailed. Like everyone knows that the government flies U2 planes for surveillance, but their maximum altitude and endurance might be classified. So it's possible to have an email that is mostly fine but includes a few classified details. This complexity is why it has taken so long to review and release all her emails. Every single one has to be reviewed by relevant experts.
In short, people hear "classified information" and immediately think of something like the "NOC list" of covert agents from Mission Impossible. The reality is that immense amounts of information are classified, and it's easy to screw up. There is a reason the FBI said that no prosecutor would bother prosecuting Clinton.
The FBI published parts of the Investigation [1]. There is also a seperate one into the Clinton Foundation [2]. And there seams to exist a declassified email+attachement between Petraeus (CIA) and Hillary where they had to edge out a serial [3].
The emails aren't usually stored encrypted - they have to be readable, after all. The hard drive could be encrypted, but that's separate from the emails themselves being encrypted.
The main email account of the United States Secretary of State was sitting on a non-government, not-very-well-physically-secured, not-even-all-that-well-electronically-secured email server. That's a really bad lapse (one that could significantly harm the US in various international situations, if any foreign government breached the server). It is also very much against the rules.
Worse is the "optics" of it. It at least looks like she did this so that nobody could use those emails against her during her run for president, because nobody could find them. That makes you wonder what kind of dirt was in them. It also looks like she thinks the rules are for other people, but not for her.
Government emails are required to go through official government servers for a multitude of reasons, one of which is transparency of government and the ability to fulfil FOIA requests.
Encryption doesn't solve the problem because the problem is that she was breaking the law and attempting to hide information from the American people
from the conspiracy theorist POV, the suspicion was a pay-to-play Department of State, where donations to the Clinton Foundation were used to buy favors with the government. There were many large Middle Eastern donors to the foundation at a time when we made some of our largest arms deals to authoritarian governments there.
> President Elect Trump has promised to change Washington, DC and that will start with identifying and recruiting the finest men and women from across the country to serve in his Administration. Any individual who wishes to serve the Administration should utilize this online application in order to participate.
Interesting. While [1] claims "President Elect Trump has promised to change Washington, DC and that will start with identifying and recruiting the finest men and women from across the country to serve in his Administration.", this website also allows for non-US citizens to apply. Does anyone have the information if the application is open for non-US citizens, provided that they fulfill the requirements to become US citizens?
> "Donald J. Trump is the very definition of an American success story, continually setting the standards of excellence for real estate, sports and entertainment"
For everyone flagging this and trying to pretend it doesn't exist, that's a pretty significant part of why Trump won in the first place.
Engage with it. Understand it. Stop attacking ad hominem and learn to find common ground. You don't have to like it, or even remotely agree on all points, but if you want to see any of the progress you're looking for over the next 4 years then you have to get involved.
[+] [-] micaksica|9 years ago|reply
However, we are supposed to be hackers here, not some whiny intelligentsia. Please take off your sad hat and put back on the hacker hat. Bend the rules. Enact the change that you can from the position you are in. Get involved in any way you can. We cannot change the results of the election, but we can work with the framework and try to improve it for the better. Embrace the suck, and let's step forward in any way possible.
[+] [-] ethbro|9 years ago|reply
Progress used to be made in the US through compromise. I want one thing, another person wants another, we sit down and bash out what's acceptable to both of us and the country is the better for that negotiation.
There are Trump policies that I will fight possibly to my death should they ever be attempted, but there are also a non-zero number I think might be good for this country.
As micaksica suggested, hackers act on the world they have, not on the world they wish existed.
[+] [-] snowwrestler|9 years ago|reply
The modern presidency is so complex that a transition can no longer be accomplished effectively in the time between November 8 and January 20. So a bipartisan project created the concept of multiple transition offices that get government funds to operate.
Obviously the Clinton transition office is in the process of winding now right now, and the Trump office is expanding rapidly.
[+] [-] Bartweiss|9 years ago|reply
Like, do they put together a two-page list of the most important, nonpartisan conclusions they reached and hand it off to their counterparts? I'd like to think so, but I'm hardly optimistic.
[+] [-] boyaka|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sethbannon|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrewfong|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thisisdallas|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brian-armstrong|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leesalminen|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DjangoReinhardt|9 years ago|reply
> Anyone who fills out a tax form knows how harmful the U.S. tax code is today – punishing hard work, savings, and investment. American frustration with the tax code has prompted two decades of Washington, D.C. blue ribbon commissions and detailed plans to reform the code. These efforts have not changed the tremendous burden Americans face in complying with the U.S. tax code. If a tax code were designed to punish hard work, thrift, and investment, the current U.S. tax code could serve as a blueprint.
Autosummarizer[1] summarizes the first paragraph as follows:
> If a tax code were designed to punish hard work, thrift, and investment, the current U.S. tax code could serve as a blueprint.
Good times, America.
[0] https://www.greatagain.gov/policy/tax-reformeconomic-vision.... [1] http://autosummarizer.com/index.php
[+] [-] simosx|9 years ago|reply
First point: "Build a Wall on the Southern Border"
[+] [-] tomp|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vaishaksuresh|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kamac|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] outworlder|9 years ago|reply
I'll stop making fun of North Korea.
[+] [-] micaksica|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] simonsarris|9 years ago|reply
Clinton's campaign: "I'm with her."
Trump's campaign: "Make America Great Again."
[+] [-] sparky_|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zikes|9 years ago|reply
Edit: Found it: https://electrek.co/2016/11/10/tesla-made-more-money-last-qu...
[+] [-] synicalx|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] edwhitesell|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ajross|9 years ago|reply
Seriously contrast the stuff there with the pablum here, which boils down to junk like "education is important yo" and "we're going to eliminate excess regulation about, like, stuff".
I weep.
[+] [-] csours|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] randyrand|9 years ago|reply
Edit: not from a technological aspect. They probably had the site ready to go already. But from a human coordination standpoint.
[+] [-] Shanea93|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joshmn|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Normal_gaussian|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] outworlder|9 years ago|reply
Sure, personal server was used, etc. However, this is a community of tech literate people. We know that email is not and cannot be a secure medium. The only ways I can think of to transmit secure email messages is by making the medium irrelevant (encryption), or by using something else (ie. private 'secure' email-like mechanism).
Had the emails been encrypted, it wouldn't matter if they were stored on top of the hollywood sign. So what gives? Does that mean that the US transfers classified information through totally insecure channels?
[+] [-] snowwrestler|9 years ago|reply
Quite a few of the emails in Clinton's inbox that contained classified information were drafted by other people in other agencies (including CIA, NSA, etc) who either did not realize that a particular piece of info was classified, or who wanted to get it to her quickly through the most convenient medium--they did a risk/reward calculation and hit send.
The other thing to know about classified information is that it does not get unclassified just because it's public. So if I email you a NYTimes article about a classified drone strike program, you now have classified info in your inbox. Again, that explains some of the emails she had in her inbox--forwarding news stories around.
Finally, the amount of classified information is staggering and detailed. Like everyone knows that the government flies U2 planes for surveillance, but their maximum altitude and endurance might be classified. So it's possible to have an email that is mostly fine but includes a few classified details. This complexity is why it has taken so long to review and release all her emails. Every single one has to be reviewed by relevant experts.
In short, people hear "classified information" and immediately think of something like the "NOC list" of covert agents from Mission Impossible. The reality is that immense amounts of information are classified, and it's easy to screw up. There is a reason the FBI said that no prosecutor would bother prosecuting Clinton.
[+] [-] _up|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton
[2] https://vault.fbi.gov/william-j.-clinton-foundation
[3] https://vault.fbi.gov/david-howell-petraeus - (last pages of 2nd pdf)
[+] [-] AnimalMuppet|9 years ago|reply
The main email account of the United States Secretary of State was sitting on a non-government, not-very-well-physically-secured, not-even-all-that-well-electronically-secured email server. That's a really bad lapse (one that could significantly harm the US in various international situations, if any foreign government breached the server). It is also very much against the rules.
Worse is the "optics" of it. It at least looks like she did this so that nobody could use those emails against her during her run for president, because nobody could find them. That makes you wonder what kind of dirt was in them. It also looks like she thinks the rules are for other people, but not for her.
[+] [-] ryanx435|9 years ago|reply
Encryption doesn't solve the problem because the problem is that she was breaking the law and attempting to hide information from the American people
[+] [-] grzm|9 years ago|reply
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/hillary-clint...
I found this podcast useful regarding the legal nitty-gritty:
http://openargs.com/oa13-hillary-clintons-damned-emails/
[+] [-] cobbzilla|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neogodless|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leesalminen|9 years ago|reply
https://apply.ptt.gov/yourstory
> President Elect Trump has promised to change Washington, DC and that will start with identifying and recruiting the finest men and women from across the country to serve in his Administration. Any individual who wishes to serve the Administration should utilize this online application in order to participate.
https://apply.ptt.gov/
[+] [-] vedranm|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.greatagain.gov/serve-america.html
[+] [-] tluyben2|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kamac|9 years ago|reply
Also, from https://www.greatagain.gov/meet-president-elect.html
> "Donald J. Trump is the very definition of an American success story, continually setting the standards of excellence for real estate, sports and entertainment"
How humble.
[+] [-] koenigdavidmj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snowwindwaves|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris_wot|9 years ago|reply
https://www.greatagain.gov/news/help-wanted-4000-presidentia...
[+] [-] benjaminjosephw|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zikes|9 years ago|reply
Engage with it. Understand it. Stop attacking ad hominem and learn to find common ground. You don't have to like it, or even remotely agree on all points, but if you want to see any of the progress you're looking for over the next 4 years then you have to get involved.
[+] [-] alistproducer2|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MrZongle2|9 years ago|reply