A federal civil servant writes:

The new Trump administration’s effort to both get a grip on and dismantle the federal workforce has also been a dystopian farce, climaxing Tuesday evening, after the Office of Personnel Management sent an email offering what the media has described as a “buyout” to all federal employees. This saga began shortly after Donald Trump took office, when someone asserting the authority of OPM began spamming federal workers with emails demanding a reply. In one breath, the message asked all employees to respond “Yes” to confirm that the system was working, but it also warned employees to be cautious about the contents of emails coming to them. Meanwhile, the note itself was flagged, for recipients with a government email account, as having come from an “[EXTERNAL]” source—and thus not necessarily one to be trusted.

Then, Tuesday night, federal workers were sent an email announcing a “fork in the road.” Again, the message was flagged by government servers as “[EXTERNAL].” This email, much of which was copied and pasted from a similar message sent to Twitter employees after Elon Musk—Trump’s pick to lead his effort to overhaul the civil service, otherwise known as the Department of Government Efficiency—took over that company, proclaims that the federal workforce will be undergoing significant changes. Anyone who didn’t want to participate in this new vision was invited to reply “Resign” to the flagged-as-external email address and collect six months’ salary, without having to perform any additional work, while they looked for a new job. The details of this offer are confusing, conflict with later OPM “FAQs” about the program, and seem to run afoul of long-standing legal caps on severance packages.

Welcome to government by chatbot.

This latest buyout directive is evocative of A.I. gobbledygook, beyond evidently being a copy-and-paste job from Musk’s Twitter exploits. When technologists assess a new A.I. language tool, the go-to metric is generally not the accuracy of its product, or even the consistency of its answers. It is engagement. Substance is pushed aside in pursuit of simply keeping human eyeballs trained on its messages for as long as possible. Once considered a proxy for content’s ability to be “valuable” or “worthwhile,” attention itself has become the commodity we’re after: looks, likes, clicks, play next episode. Unfortunately, one of the easiest ways to engage people is to enrage them.

Like a chatbot in training, the Musk-Miller-Trump administration is not a principled political entity concerned with substance, consistency, or competence. [Continue reading…]