There are important factual differences compared to the challenges against OpenAI, but I think yes this decision does ultimately offer them some new legal protection against whatever customers decide to do with their tools.
That's a good point too and one I wasn't even trying to make. I was thinking more in terms of how the big LLM players trained their models using torrents etc.
If I recall, that was exactly what happened early on in DOGE's tenure. Senior personnel were explicitly directed to grant admin access to DOGE personnel, and auditing/logging were disabled. This was widely reported at the time. I don't remember whether there were threats of termination, but it would not surprise me.
The "fun" thing was when some agencies started then seeing access attempts from Russian IPs sometimes as soon as 15 minutes after this happened, using credentials that were valid and created by/for DOGE people...
Honest question. Why isn't stuff like this a bigger deal? Why isn't anyone being held accountable for what is undeniably a national security incident?
I can understand why the administration would try to bury it. But I wouldn't have heard of most of the shitty stuff Doge employees have done were it not for HN. Why isn't this getting more media coverage?
Right? And many of the DOGE people who were outed were shown/known/had convictions for being involved in cybercrime gangs and such. I get it, in a controlled manner, for some cybersecurity jobs, but even at face value, that was nothing about what was DOGE was doing.
reply