It reminds me of an article that claimed Britain has become a more civil and less honest place in the last few decades. (The Economist, maybe?) Perhaps some workplaces are like that too. Whether it's a good thing or not, who knows. People clearly have their preference one way or the other.
This specific case is tied to complicated American politics, but I guess small versions of the same debate are happening in workplaces all over the world. Though maybe, ironically, not in the most intensely policed workplaces.
Got it. But for a lot of us this is not entirely reasonable at all.
The point about AI isn't about efficiency, it's about accountability. This administration already has a huge accountability problem, and the AI is another layer of "Oh, that wasn't really me who did that thing I did." This isn't just cynicism, the current admin is incapable of taking responsibility for anything they've done wrong (and perfectly willing to take full responsibility for things other people have done right).
> Trump / Doge / Musk is snooping
It's pretty normal to monitor communication channels
> for anti Trump / Elon communication
It's pretty normal to have informal speech codes at work, which include don't un-constructively criticize your employer or parent company.
> using AI
Okay, it just does what humans do except more efficiently
> but the AI is not compliant to some regulation
I don't know and I don't think you know either
> but they don't "report" to him
They're still part of the federal government. Again, I don't think its unreasonable and its certainly not productive
At a certain point I realize there aren't any real objections other than [orange | rocket] man bad.
There's a lot to criticize with this administration but criticizing absolutely everything, even when its entirely reasonable, doesn't help sway people's opinions. So when people read hysterical headlines about how the federal government is spying on federal employees by accessing their pay information, they just tune out.