Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by uLogMicheal 493 days ago
The alarmist take is jumping to the conclusion that people will starve from efforts to improve the code behind this system. We can still print paper checks, probably with a simple script in the worst case.
1 comments

Concern over even a low possibility of a catastrophic event is hardly alarmist.

And what if your assumption about printing checks is wrong? I find no basis for that assumption, by the way.

We're talking about payment system code, not AI targeting for drones. Changes can be reverted, transactions can be stopped, payments can be made other ways.
No they cannot, not legally, and certainly not in a timely manner.

There are simply no mechanisms in place to do what you're saying, nor does there appear to be any willingness to correct errors, given the desire to cut spending. Missed payments may be a feature, not a bug.

> nor does there appear to be any willingness to correct errors

> Missed payments may be a feature, not a bug.

> not legally, and certainly not in a timely manner.

Bad faith magic wand waving, these arguments do not have substance. People/bots are on a bandwagon against change many have been calling for years for. Our treasury system NEEDS an overhaul and there are much bigger problems with this admin to make an issue out of.

You say bad faith, but then you equivocate all "change" like any difference is good, or that Congress ought not be involved in the decisions related to how to spend government money, which is wildly unconstitutional.