I think they can be trusted to at least state a goal that they truly intend to follow through on...and then get it wrong if the reality is more complicated. Example: Elon was initially saying 2 year severances for those who get laid off. The best I've seen was an offer of 8 months, though, which is definitely less than 2 years. But...with unemployment benefits as well, perhaps that ends up getting close enough.

The reason I don't consider this to be a lie, per se, is because they make promises around goals with incomplete understanding and data and then recalibrate as more information becomes available.

It would still be excellent to limit the surface area of what DOGE can touch and do and how fast, though, so we don't have to be so stressed about needing to trust DOGE's changes.

Trust is objectively bad for systems design and processes, especially without audit and oversight! Everything should be trustless whenever it can be. They have broken every best practice in the book.

> because they make promises around goals with incomplete understanding and data and then recalibrate as more information becomes available.

Perhaps you should simply announce an investigation, then deliver findings of the investigation and recommendations.

They're starting with the end in mind - the dismantling of the administrative state - then making cuts. Then finding out what the impact might be, then continuing cuts.

There is no good faith here, and there is nothing in 'doubt' that someone should benefit from.

> I don't consider this to be a lie, per se, is because they make promises around goals with incomplete understanding

They didn't even try to formulate an understanding. All of their actions show willful and deliberate disregard for how the system works. That's not "incomplete understanding" or a good faith effort.

Even if you believe that trust shouldn't be earned, it is inadvisable to believe anything that Elon Musk says is in good faith. How many more examples do you need after the Hyperloop debacle? Here's an expanding list: https://elonmusk.today

How many times do you need to be lied to by the exact same person before you realize that facts don't mean anything to them?

At this point, I'm surprised when I hear something from Musk that is verifiably true.

>I've seen was an offer of 8 months

Wasn't that actually "if you agree to resign and leave next September we'll continue paying your salary until then and you wont have to RTO if you work remotely" rather that actually 8 months of severance?

> then recalibrate as more information becomes available.

So you are waiting until they will start actually lying when they have more information (instead of "just" being incompetent)?

Giving someone who has proven time and time again to be exceptionally dishonest (Trump but also arguably Musk) the benefit of the doubt seems unwise. Why would they suddenly stop lying?

The fact alone that they have promised a huge tax cut to high income earners will will inevitably outweigh any potential savings by DOGE means that any claims about reducing public debt are inherently dishonest.

>with unemployment benefits as well, perhaps that ends up getting close enough

It won't be, unemployment benefits are a fraction of what the severance benefits are. Its disingenuous to bundle them together due to that fact alone.