On one hand I want to say Thank you, John, for the kind of muchraking we need now more than ever. I sure hope this goes somewhere.
On the other hand, I have no problem busting my butt for thousands in hopes of millions. Until I realize how dishonest posers steal the key to billions without doing any work at all.
Knowing that this sort of thing goes on all the time doesn't diminish the anger that comes from reading about it.
Why do you believe Dvorak but not the guy who was vetted by a presidential administration?
Fair question.
1. OP was well written and seemed well supported. If he's wrong about the degrees, then he's wrong and so am I. We'll find out soon enough.
2. "Attack the messenger" is a last resort tactic used when you don't know how to "attack the content". It doesn't work with me.
3. I believe that the vetting is strictly for political purposes, not for achievement or better use of taxpayer dollars. At least Dvorak earned his own way instead of sucking at the federal teat that I help fund. That gets him a little extra cred from me.
Sounds a little like, "He said, she said..." I don't know. I only know what I read here at hn :-). If OP is wrong then shame on me for believing him. He'll never have the same credibility with me again.
I find it interesting that you believed before the accusations were verified. Even Dvorak phrases his "report" as a question, as does ths submitter.
I can understand why you might wonder if Vivek Kundra is qualified after reading Dvoraks' blog. I did too, and I still haven't made up my mind, but I certainly didn't (and don't) believe Dvorak's repport just on his say so. Someone else asked "why don't you believe the White House instead of Dvorak?"
I thought the whole thing was not about belief but rather about verification of claims.
Well if you're going to complain that a guy "[does] not sound like someone who studied computers or technology" it would be more convincing if there weren't several well-known instances of you demonstrating a lack of knowledge of computers and technology.
"Well if you're going to complain that a guy "[does] not sound like someone who studied computers or technology" it would be more convincing if there weren't several well-known instances of you demonstrating a lack of knowledge of computers and technology."
but that is not the real "complaint". Dvorak just says that led him to dig deeper. The accusation (or "complaint"if you will) is that Kundra fudged his credentials. It doesn't matter how technical Dvorak is for the truth or falsity of that statement. Attack the accusation (which is very specific and can be easily disproved) not the accuser.
I remember that, and I smile about that prediction as I use my cable modem to access the Internet, but I count his technical objection as prescient when I experience local modem pool latency here. Cable modems are a kluge, not a sound technical solution to broadband at home.
On one hand I want to say Thank you, John, for the kind of muchraking we need now more than ever. I sure hope this goes somewhere.
On the other hand, I have no problem busting my butt for thousands in hopes of millions. Until I realize how dishonest posers steal the key to billions without doing any work at all.
Knowing that this sort of thing goes on all the time doesn't diminish the anger that comes from reading about it.