Tracy
@tkdysart.bsky.social
American living in Switzerland with my husband, dog and 2 cats. A little concerned that my goal in life is to spend as little time as possible dealing with humans.
Reposted by Tracy
We don't have to guess how an at-will public employment system will be used under Trump, because we have a de facto at-will system already in place.
Under that system, here are some of the reasons you can be fired from the federal government:
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/at-will-wh...
Under that system, here are some of the reasons you can be fired from the federal government:
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/at-will-wh...
December 9, 2025 at 3:00 PM
We don't have to guess how an at-will public employment system will be used under Trump, because we have a de facto at-will system already in place.
Under that system, here are some of the reasons you can be fired from the federal government:
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/at-will-wh...
Under that system, here are some of the reasons you can be fired from the federal government:
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/at-will-wh...
Reposted by Tracy
CBP *still* claims that it has no deal with Meta and that these are personal glasses owned by the agents. If they're personal glasses, though, then it is illegal for the agent to record
![CBP’s policy on recording devices states that “no personally owned devices may be used in lieu of IDVRS [Incident Driven Video Recording Systems] to record law enforcement encounters.” It adds that “recorded data shall not be downloaded or recorded for personal use or posted onto a personally owned device.” The broader DHS policy says that “the use of personally owned [Body Worn Cameras] or other video, audio, or digital recording devices to record official law enforcement activities is prohibited.”](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:cjfcz3t36f6nrprarkhkycxo/bafkreihrg6bpndw5yhgmljaty44vx4b2bhwrzsehbtafxkzhgb5hbltwme@jpeg)
December 9, 2025 at 3:27 PM
CBP *still* claims that it has no deal with Meta and that these are personal glasses owned by the agents. If they're personal glasses, though, then it is illegal for the agent to record
Reposted by Tracy
It's been 10 years since I wrote this for the New York Times.
I toned it down for the editors there, but I really should've insisted on a more hysterical tone.
I toned it down for the editors there, but I really should've insisted on a more hysterical tone.
December 9, 2025 at 1:12 AM
It's been 10 years since I wrote this for the New York Times.
I toned it down for the editors there, but I really should've insisted on a more hysterical tone.
I toned it down for the editors there, but I really should've insisted on a more hysterical tone.
Reposted by Tracy
My colleague points out here that possibly one in seven requests to our library now may be assisted by LLMs.
When those point to fictional documents, that's a huge staff time drain. There's often no quick way to check if an undigitized primary source doc exists beyond physically pulling some boxes.
When those point to fictional documents, that's a huge staff time drain. There's often no quick way to check if an undigitized primary source doc exists beyond physically pulling some boxes.
December 9, 2025 at 2:06 AM
My colleague points out here that possibly one in seven requests to our library now may be assisted by LLMs.
When those point to fictional documents, that's a huge staff time drain. There's often no quick way to check if an undigitized primary source doc exists beyond physically pulling some boxes.
When those point to fictional documents, that's a huge staff time drain. There's often no quick way to check if an undigitized primary source doc exists beyond physically pulling some boxes.
Reposted by Tracy
Read this as an American woman and then go break something.
December 8, 2025 at 6:53 PM
Read this as an American woman and then go break something.
Reposted by Tracy
December 8, 2025 at 4:53 PM