Is there any proof that they're coding errors? A simpler explanation, to me at least, is that they first blanket fired people by dubious criteria, and are now using this as an excuse to backpedal when they realize they've cut something important.
"Coding error" could mean anywhere from "we wrote an actual good-faith attempt to measure some sort of performance, there was a bug, and we blindly followed what it said without double checking" to "the code we wrote to 'select * from employees' when firing people was in 'error' in hindsight because we now wish to have some of those people working for us again".
No matter how you cut it, in the absolute best case scenario, the people doing the firing were so incompetent that no one can tell they weren't being malicious.
The median scenario, they were simply being malicious.
Non partisan take, in every circumstance coding errors are a euphemism for “leadership is humiliated by the outcome and wants to shirk responsibility”.
Seen this real-life: management ask for some unannounced change on prices. Everyone in IT tells them "this is gonna backfire fast". No way to budge them on it so we apply. A couple hours later support and sales are getting hammered by unhappy clients so we get to rollback as fast as possible. The official excuse? "That's an error from IT".
Nope, the code worked perfectly and did what was asked of it.
They are in charge of making cuts but never bothered to understand what the departments do, the value, or where the excesses are. Yet they still make the cuts.
The Trump admin has stated over and over it is malice.
Russell Vought, Trump’s pick for the director of the Office of Management and Budget (a job he held during Trump’s first term), has said: “We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work, because they are increasingly viewed as the villains.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrati...
I think there needs to be one more element like agency? Because under this definition of evil, a sponge elected as president is evil although it wouldn't do anything at all in any situation. Maybe that's still evil?
Doesn't matter if it's coding error or not, the blame lies with the people executing the firings and those ordering them; blaming it on code is a way to shirk responsibilities.
I get that within a software development project, blaming on individuals isn't a healthy way to deal with bugs, but this extends beyond just loss of revenue or uptime and well into personal tragedies.
DOGE did take DOD's AutoRIF which was meant to assist with RIF calculations and modify it. It was also required to be reviewed by a human before initiating any actual separations with it, though DOGE probably went the efficient route and did a "lgtm" rubber stamp on it without looking. However it was just meant to do calculations based on RIF requirement (years in service, veterans preference stuff, and the like) not make any unsupervised decisions based on it.
This was pretty insane to me. Like, whatever systems you're claiming Biden screwed up were 100% guaranteed untouched since the last trump admin. IT in the government moves slooooooow.
"Political enemies fired by a coding error" is an obviously idiotic claim on its face. And when called on it, they immediately double down on their innocence by somehow blaming the firings on Joe Biden. Who is triple checks notes no longer involved in the US government in any way. This has been Trump's playbook forever. Outright lie about things, and if that doesn't work, pivot to a different lie. Always deflect blame. Never, ever, admit fault.
A whole lot of harm could have been averted if the media was willing to call him out on this 10+ years ago instead of embrace the profit potential. But welp.
The article somewhat buries the facts but a couple of important ones:
- They were able to get them reinstated within 24 hours.
- A presentation seen by Science said the overall NIH RIF (reduction in force) was based on administrative codes and that some “may not have been intentional.”
If this was the first "mistake" made by the new administration and DOGE, then these items would be understandable. Or the second mistake. Or the third, maybe.
This is intentional. That is the only conclusion one can draw now. From the terseness of the letters of dismissal to the unreliability of the message ('you're fired! Wait, no you're not!'), one can only assume this is part of the destruction of democratic institutions that the current administration is pursuing.
This administration has tens of billions of dollars in spending and an immense amount of waste. Even if they were 99.9% accurate by this metric or that, there's going to be many mistakes. And the media is going to work to drag out the worst of the worst mistakes. And those worst of the worst are things like this - a guy being accidentally placed on leave pending dismissal for less than 24 hours?
Obviously everybody would prefer there be 0 mistakes, but I think in general this is, ironically, quite a good indicator!