Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JumpCrisscross 356 days ago
> We can't actually say this was DOGE

The article is saying it was DOGE. DOGE directly attacked our hurricane-forecasting capacity [1]. OMB, i.e. Vought, continues that attack [2].

Given the top three states by hurricane risk voted for Trump in ‘24 [3][4] this should make for an entertaining hurricane season. (Particularly if both a red and blue state get hit and request federal assistance.)

[1] https://apnews.com/article/national-weather-service-layoffs-...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOAA_under_the_second_presid...

[3] https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/states-most-at-risk-for-...

[4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_president...

1 comments

> The article is saying it was DOGE

Yah, but it's the guardian. They aren't exactly reliable.

For it to be DOGE would require a time machine, because this project was shut down in 2015.

> but it's the guardian. They aren't exactly reliable

This is valid and I'm open to someone calling out the reporting as non-factual with evidence.

Pretending The Guardian is trying to imply this was DOGE when it straight out says as much, on the other hand, is closer to a reading-comprehension issue.